Universal to use DTS-HD MA as their Blu-ray standard [Text View]

Grubert

05-01-08, 03:05 PM

DTS MA = TrueHD = PCM

Wow. Can't wait to snap up all those TrueHD HD DVDs cheap while you guys go bonkers for the same damn sound with a different name.

You're right, only 113 out of 148 titles will have a real upgrade:

12 Monkeys
2 Fast 2 Furious
American Gangster
American Me
An American Werewolf in London
Animal House
Apollo 13
Army of Darkness
Assault on Precinct 13
Atonement
Backdraft
Being John Malkovich
Billy Madison
Born on the Fourth of July
Breach
Brokeback Mountain
Bruce Almighty
Bulletproof
Casino
Children of Men
Cinderella Man
Dante's Peak
Daylight
Dazed & Confused
Dead Silence (Unrated)
Doom
Dragonheart
Dune (1984)
Elizabeth
Erin Brockovich
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
Fast & Furious
Fast Times at Ridgemont High
Field of Dreams
Friday Night Lights
Half Baked
Happy Gilmore
Heroes - Season 1
Hollywoodland
Hot Fuzz
How The Grinch Stole Christmas
Hulk
In Good Company
Jarhead
Jet Li's Fearless
King Kong
Knocked Up
Land of the Dead
Liar Liar
Lost in Translation
Mallrats
Meet Joe Black
Meet the Fockers
Meet the Parents
Mercury Rising
Miami Vice
Midnight Run
Monty Python's The Meaning of Life
Mystery Men
Out of Sight
Pitch Black (Unrated)
Ray
Red Dragon
Scent of a Woman
Sea of Love
Seabiscuit
Serenity
Shaun of the Dead
Slither
Smokey and the Bandit
Smokin' Aces
Sneakers
Spartacus
Spy Game
Streets of Fire
The 40-Year-Old Virgin
The Big Lebowski
The Bone Collector
The Bourne Identity
The Bourne Supremacy
The Breakfast Club
The Break-Up
The Chronicles of Riddick
The Deer Hunter
The Fast & The Furious: Tokyo Drift
The Frighteners
The Game
The Good Shepherd
The Hitcher
The Hurricane
The Interpreter
The Jerk
The Kingdom
The Mummy
The Mummy Returns
The Nutty Professor
The River
The Rundown
The Scorpion King
The Skeleton Key
The Sting
The Thing
The Watcher
The Wedding Date
Timecop
Traffic
U-571
Unleashed
Van Helsing
Waist Deep
Waterworld
What Dreams May Come
You Me & Dupree

briankmonkey

05-01-08, 03:18 PM

Nice Grubert :D

Maybe he doesn't have an audio system. Do you have one yet GizmoDVD? Or are you only into half of the HD experience?

Wedlock

05-01-08, 03:40 PM

I can hear it already , U-571 in wonderfull DTS-HD Master Audio WOWOWOWOW........

Bring it on Universal !

townofturley

05-01-08, 03:45 PM

Dam it, I just pee on my pants:D

Did you pee "on" or "in" your pants? Either way, no one will believe it without pictures. Please supply.

TwinTurboZX

05-01-08, 03:50 PM

More solid proof that HDDVD just wasn't "good enough". ;)

thebland

05-01-08, 03:51 PM

DTS MA on all Universal releases!!!!

Great News for Blu Ray!!!!:D

bplewis24

05-01-08, 04:08 PM

More solid proof that HDDVD just wasn't "good enough". ;)

No need for that type of baiting. Let's just appreciate that Universal is actually doing more than the minimum in porting over their HD DVD encodes, making it worth the wait for the BD faithful.

Brandon

Woodshed

05-01-08, 04:10 PM

No need for that type of baiting. Let's just appreciate that Universal is actually doing more than the minimum in porting over their HD DVD encodes, making it worth the wait for the BD faithful.

Brandon

Well worth the wait. What a great move by Uni, make current owners happy and cause a few HD DVD owners to double-dip for the BR. :)

NovaKane

05-01-08, 04:14 PM

omirp

05-01-08, 04:17 PM

Dam it, I just pee on my pants

Did you pee "on" or "in" your pants? Either way, no one will believe it without pictures. Please supply.

Please

rveras

05-01-08, 04:31 PM

Did you pee "on" or "in" your pants? Either way, no one will believe it without pictures. Please supply.

:D:D:D:D:D Oops I meant to say "I pee my pants!!". Hey, I was all excited because of this news and the Celtics were kicking butt. Sorry no pictures.

zoro

05-01-08, 05:10 PM

How about CASPER and E. T.

William

05-01-08, 05:15 PM

:D:D:D:D:D Oops I meant to say "I pee my pants!!".... Sorry no pictures.

Actually "it's wet my pants" or "pee in my pants".:D Also I'm willing to take your word for it and don't feel the need for pictures.;) Although that does beg the question: Are you very young or very old?:eek:

rveras

05-01-08, 05:31 PM

Actually "it's wet my pants" or "pee in my pants".:D Also I'm willing to take your word for it and don't feel the need for pictures.;) Although that does beg the question: Are you very young or very old?:eek:

Middle. Dam it I got it wrong again!!!:o I should just shut up now!!! What can I say, I'm Spanish and my English grammar is not that good :o (but getting better) Sorry!!

bunkaroo

05-01-08, 05:31 PM

50GB FTW? You decide. :cool:

PioManiac

05-01-08, 05:38 PM

Imeldhil

05-01-08, 05:48 PM

The PS3 decodes the DTS-MA internally and send it via LPCM to receiver, so if I was you I would get the 705, as it goes all the way up to 7.1 with PCM inputs, the 605 doesn't./ i can tell you, i have the PS3-605 combo.

What are you saying man??? I have a PS3 and an Onkyo 605. I have been able to see New Line titles with DTS HD MA 7.1 and actually GET the 7.1, as well as Lionsgate titles with PCM 7.1 without ANY type of problems. However, when I wanna see a 6.1 film I have to chane the config of the onkyo to 6.1 to get it.

So check you config dude!

Scoob

05-01-08, 07:23 PM

Beerstalker

05-01-08, 09:08 PM

Tom Monahan

05-01-08, 10:23 PM

Unless they redo the video transfers on many of their titles I won't be replacing my Universal HD DVD's with the Blu-Rays. I don't care how good something sounds if the video is edge enhanced crap improved audio only isn't worth the upgrade expense to this video guy. I'm much more into picture quality than the audio as you can tell:)

Tom

Faceless Rebel

05-01-08, 11:24 PM

This is a brilliant move by Universal. I for one have enjoyed the upgrade on my PS3. Not only are they upgrading their product, they are causing suckers like me to double dip on a few titles. Good for Universal for kicking things up a notch. DTS HD MA rocks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Universal has shown former members of the dead format's camp the way forward. The company which once pushed the dead format as 'The Look and Sound of Perfect' tacitly admits with this decision that in fact their format was in fact perfect in neither audio nor video and has embraced the superior bitrate and capacity of Blu wholeheartedly by supporting a lossless audio format in all Blu releases.

I wish some of the more emotionally attached fanboys here could let it go the way Universal has. In the end, it's just a business, and Universal did exactly what they needed to do to make a big splash on their new format. Well done, Universal. :)

wco81

05-02-08, 12:36 AM

Have they announced a date for Casino?

nyg

05-02-08, 06:46 AM

Have they announced a date for Casino?

Not yet. I'm hoping that one makes it out soon as well. The PQ on the HD DVD was terrific. Add to that DTS-HD MA on the BD and it'll be one hell of a nice disc for an incredible movie. :)

lgans316

05-02-08, 07:19 AM

Not yet. I'm hoping that one makes it out soon as well. The PQ on the HD DVD was terrific. Add to that DTS-HD MA on the BD and it'll be one hell of a nice disc for an incredible movie. :)

I disagree. There were plenty of soft shots and dirts/specks throughout the movie. It was yet another uncleaned title thrown to us by Universal.

DM2006RI

05-02-08, 08:28 AM

The company which once pushed the dead format as 'The Look and Sound of Perfect' tacitly admits with this decision that in fact their format was in fact perfect in neither audio nor video and has embraced the superior bitrate and capacity of Blu wholeheartedly by supporting a lossless audio format in all Blu releases.

Oh please. The high bit rate has anything to do with the quality of their source materials or the age of their masters? BD has won the format war but spare us -- lousy source materials going in = lousy transfer going out, NO MATTER what the almighty bit-rate meter tells you. :rolleyes:

Woodshed

05-02-08, 08:48 AM

50GB FTW? You decide. :cool:

IMO it is a mix between that and the much higher BW ceiling. :)

Woodshed

05-02-08, 08:50 AM

Oh please. The high bit rate has anything to do with the quality of their source materials or the age of their masters? BD has won the format war but spare us -- lousy source materials going in = lousy transfer going out, NO MATTER what the almighty bit-rate meter tells you. :rolleyes:

Wasnt he speaking specifically about the ability to include lossless audio? Which directly correlates to higher BW and capacity.

Where did he say that all of the crappy masters would now be great because of higher bitrates and capacity?

Let it go.

TwinTurboZX

05-02-08, 10:55 AM

Wasnt he speaking specifically about the ability to include lossless audio? Which directly correlates to higher BW and capacity.

Where did he say that all of the crappy masters would now be great because of higher bitrates and capacity?

Let it go.

Take it easy on these former HDDVD supporters, they just found out the format that they poured all that money into was indeed gimped from the start. Of course, us Blu-ray supporters knew that all along hence our support for the superior format. I guess the designers of HDDVD forgot that a next generation home video format should accommodate both high def video AND SOUND. Pure comedy! :D

Jiffylush

05-02-08, 11:00 AM

And here I thought the format war ended with the Warner announcement, silly me.

bplewis24

05-02-08, 11:14 AM

And here I thought the format war ended with the Warner announcement, silly me.

I propose the mods should allow us one format-war-thread per month for nostalgia purposes. Maybe once per year?

Kinda like all of the civil war re-enactments out there :D

Brandon

CraigW

05-02-08, 11:14 AM

Well I seem to remember a while back Amir stating that DTS-MA was more flexible with the variable bit rate than TrueHD. I would guess if thats true, it would be a major advantage in using it. My memory isn't entirely clear on that post though, I'm sure someone here can dig it up though.:o

The difference between the two systems when comparing the bandwidth vs. BD storage space is negligible.

I am all for Universal using lossless and now that PS3 has dts-HDMA it is less of an issue. BUT, dts-HDMA is NOT supported by the vast majority of SA and some of the first generation players were upgraded to support TrueHD so from that standpoint TrueHD makes more sense.

dts-HDMA requires a lot of DSP processing power compared to TrueHD (which is basically an update of the DVD-A Meridian Lossless Packeting codec).

But I suspect the reason Universal went dts is to appease Sir Steven. BUT thanks Universal for making lossless closer to the defacto standard on BD. Lossless audio due to BD larger bit bucket and bandwidth has always been BD's key advantage for consumers who wanted more than 'good enough' in the HD realm.

erasat

05-02-08, 11:58 AM

What are you saying man??? I have a PS3 and an Onkyo 605. I have been able to see New Line titles with DTS HD MA 7.1 and actually GET the 7.1, as well as Lionsgate titles with PCM 7.1 without ANY type of problems. However, when I wanna see a 6.1 film I have to chane the config of the onkyo to 6.1 to get it.

So check you config dude!

Do you mind to tell me what settings you have?

What I'm saying here is that the 605 doesn't "upgrade" the 5.1 LPCM coming from your PS3 to 7.1 as it does with bitstream codecs. But if the LPCM comes 7.1 from my PS3 the 605 just pass it 7.1.

But I must tell you, I haven't tried any DTS-MA 7.1, only 5.1 ones, so the PCM passed to my 605 have been only 5.1 ones, I assume that once I see a DTS-MA 7.1, the PS3 will decode it as a 7.1 LPCM and onbiously my 605 will pass it that way. Am I right?

eci

05-02-08, 12:52 PM

Good news, I suppose. Too bad I have no support for DTS-HD MA as it stands. Maybe one day my Sharp will be able to....

The Sharp will *never* be able to decode MA.

Patsfan123

05-02-08, 01:13 PM

Exclusive (Updated): Universal Talks Blu-ray Audio Plans
May 01, 2008

Update: We've received some questions asking for clarification on Universal's resoundingly well-received decision to adopt DTS-HD on Blu-ray. Is it really Master Audio? Or compressed 1.5 core DTS? To answer this, we'll let Universal tell you in their own words.

"Universal (editor's note: Blu-ray) titles contain DTS-HD Master Audio (Lossless) on all English tracks."

Now you know, and knowing... well, you know the rest!

All english tracks?!

shiznit

05-02-08, 01:46 PM

I might double dip on a couple of titles that I have on HD DVD, but there is no way I am re-buying all of the Universal Blu-rays that I have on HD DVD as they come out... I have said it once and I will say it again, I should have known better than buying into Toshiba! I WILL NEVER BUY ANOTHER TOSHIBA PRODUCT AGAIN! How long do you guys figure until Toshiba goes "Belly up"???

On another note, I look forward to new Universal releases on Blu-ray with DTS-MA. :D

elvisizer

05-02-08, 02:12 PM

The problem for me is that you dont get a nightmode with DTS.

Some actually have neighbours... ;)

Also, what will they do in Europe were they sometimes add 6 langues tracks?

4-5mbs peaks * 6 = 24-30 mbs
That would require playing all 6 tracks at once! :eek:

wakashizuma

05-02-08, 02:31 PM

That would require playing all 6 tracks at once! :eek:

Well all the audio tracks within the feature run at the same time and occupy bandwidth. By choosing tracks, you simply choose one of the tracks running in the background.

CraigW

05-02-08, 02:38 PM

I propose the mods should allow us one format-war-thread per month for nostalgia purposes. Maybe once per year?

Kinda like all of the civil war re-enactments out there :D

Brandon

Flame on to that idea Brandon :D

At this point I think there are a few MSFT HD DVD diehards who will never admit that BD had potential to be a better product. BD's superiority is now starting show with lossless audio becoming the defacto standard with the majority of content providers. WB is the only studio that needs to come out of the lossy audio darkages.

Goatse

05-02-08, 03:51 PM

OT but is there single TrueHD 7.1 blu ray disks??? There seem to be a decent amount of DTSMA 7.1 disks coming out but I haven't seen a single Dolby 7.1 disks.

sharkcohen

05-02-08, 03:51 PM

How long do you guys figure until Toshiba goes "Belly up"???

Probably not anytime soon considering Toshiba does alot more than make optical media hardware....

Kosty

05-02-08, 04:32 PM

Smart move by Universal. There's no way I would have double-dipped on these previously released HD DVD titles for the SOLE reason of having them on Blu.

But adding a feature, like DTS-HD MA, gives me (and I'm sure a few others) a justifiable reason to repurchase a number of these discs. It also may stop me dead in my tracks from buying some Universal HD DVD titles on fire sale pricing and instead I'll purchase them for more money on Blu-ray if I see them on the 2008 release list. I may still buy some unannounced fire sale titles but this is a reason to hold out for the Blu-ray release.

Smart move.

whippersnapper

05-02-08, 04:44 PM

I propose the mods should allow us one format-war-thread per month for nostalgia purposes. Maybe once per year?

Kinda like all of the civil war re-enactments out there :D

BrandonFolks would come to the proposed thread to observe HD-DVD fans rise from the grave clutching fire-sale HD-DVDs and pronounce doom & gloom upon all of Blu-ray'dom. "If only...." pronouncements would be made extolling the heaven on earth that would have existed if only Toshiba hadn't prematurely thrown in the towel. The wonderful video quality of up-converted DVDs will be preached. The joys of downloading videos will enumerated.

Well ..... I guess I'll pass. I see enough of this already.:)

CraigW

05-02-08, 04:53 PM

Folks would come to the proposed thread to observe HD-DVD fans rise from the grave clutching fire-sale HD-DVDs and pronounce doom & gloom upon all of Blu-ray'dom. "If only...." pronouncements would be made extolling the heaven on earth that would have existed if only Toshiba hadn't prematurely thrown in the towel. The wonderful video quality of up-converted DVDs will be preached. The joys of downloading videos will enumerated.

Well ..... I guess I'll pass. I see enough of this already.:)

Naw it would be like the hazing scene in AH. "Thank you sir! May I have another?" cried the HD DVD fanboy.

bviss

05-02-08, 05:05 PM

Is there a release list yet for Uni?

nyg

05-02-08, 05:17 PM

Is there a release list yet for Uni?

7/22 The Mummy, The Mummy Returns, The Scorpion King
8/26 Heroes: Season 1, Heroes: Season 2

bac

05-02-08, 06:02 PM

7/22 The Mummy, The Mummy Returns, The Scorpion King
8/26 Heroes: Season 1, Heroes: Season 2

Missed one :) Doomsday...

http://www.themanroom.com/news/Universals_Doomsday_on_Blu-ray_in_July/2664

J Brinkley

05-02-08, 06:13 PM

What a pleasant surprise to see Uni stepping up and creating a quality standard for their releases. This is great news and has me excited for the inevitable Bourne trilogy discs. Bring those on.

It still doesn't persuade me to buy The Mummy, though. Rachel Weisz could deliver it to my door and I'd still pass.

On a side not, imagine the shock I felt coming into a Universal thread only to find format war residual gloating and childishness. Wonders never cease.

eightninesuited

05-02-08, 06:17 PM

wormraper

05-02-08, 06:17 PM

On a side not, imagine the shock I felt coming into a Universal thread only to find format war residual gloating and childishness. Wonders never cease.

look who the culprits are, not surprising. They spread joy and cheer wherever they go :rolleyes:

however, the 2 mummy movies are must buy's for me if the PQ and AQ is a good step up from their HD DVD counterparts.

jling84

05-02-08, 06:33 PM

I really need to go and buy a new receiver to go with my PS3. What's the cheapest Onkyo that will allow me to utilize all the HD codecs?

William

05-02-08, 06:35 PM

I really need to go and buy a new receiver to go with my PS3. What's the cheapest Onkyo that will allow me to utilize all the HD codecs?

Almost any receiver with HDMI inputs will do the job.;)

cyan

05-02-08, 06:46 PM

Oh Oh, I better start stashing some money now...

I see my first official round of High Def Double-Dips commencing in a couple short months.
The Mummy/Riddick series for starters.

But even more exciting...and anxiously awaiting news on some classic Universal gems that never even made it to red,
like Gladiator, Jurassic Park! and Indiana Jones

Gladiator is distributed by DreamWorks in the US
Indiana Jones is Paramount.

So, unfortunately, this announcement doesn't affect the possible inclusion of DTS-MA on either of those two.

cyan

05-02-08, 06:47 PM

Oh Oh, I better start stashing some money now...

I see my first official round of High Def Double-Dips commencing in a couple short months.
The Mummy/Riddick series for starters.

But even more exciting...and anxiously awaiting news on some classic Universal gems that never even made it to red,
like Gladiator, Jurassic Park! and Indiana Jones

Gladiator is distributed by DreamWorks in the US. It was only theatrically handled by Universal.
Indiana Jones is Paramount.

So, unfortunately, this announcement doesn't affect the possible inclusion of DTS-MA on either of those two.

Goatse

05-02-08, 07:05 PM

Gladiator is distributed by DreamWorks in the US
Indiana Jones is Paramount.

So, unfortunately, this announcement doesn't affect the possible inclusion of DTS-MA on either of those two.

Paramount and Dreamworks is including TrueHD. Should sound great either way.

nyg

05-02-08, 07:23 PM

Missed one :) Doomsday...

http://www.themanroom.com/news/Universals_Doomsday_on_Blu-ray_in_July/2664

Man you're fast. I just saw that on your site and came back here to update my post. :)

bac

05-02-08, 07:28 PM

Man you're fast. I just saw that on your site and came back here to update my post. :)

hahaha I'm stuck inside right now and going stir crazy, that's why!

Actually your post is what prompted me to publish that as I've been holding the date for a little while. And no, I don't have any others :)

J Brinkley

05-02-08, 07:34 PM

What? The Mummy was a fun movie. The sequel was crap, but the first was good popcorn fun.

I just never found any love for it for some reason, I'm not sure quite why. And I love a good popcorn movie. Go figure. I'm sure it will sound great, though.

Steve Burke

05-02-08, 10:47 PM

Almost any receiver with HDMI inputs will do the job.;)

Have to be careful, some receivers only do HDMI switching, and does not handle audio over HDMI.

eci

05-03-08, 01:06 AM

I really need to go and buy a new receiver to go with my PS3. What's the cheapest Onkyo that will allow me to utilize all the HD codecs?

Cheap is not the way to go with an AVR. The AVR is the HEART of your sound quality. I'd take a high end AVR with DD over some cheap piece of crap with DTS-HD MA any day of the week. NEVER skimp on your amp.

eci

05-03-08, 01:07 AM

Almost any receiver with HDMI inputs will do the job.;)

Wrong. Many HDMI receivers are HDMI 1.1, such as my Denon 4306.

UxiSXRD

05-03-08, 01:18 AM

And the Denon 4306 with HDMI 1.1 proves that PCM is the only output we'll ever need. Definitely a level 6 "future-proof" receiver. Love mine. :D

Now that the PS3 does DTS-HDMA, I don't mind this, but still hope we see PCM output from Universal and Paramount.

bplewis24

05-03-08, 02:41 AM

It still doesn't persuade me to buy The Mummy, though. Rachel Weisz could deliver it to my door and I'd still pass.

I bet you wouldn't pass on Rachel ;)

Brandon

Paul Cordingley

05-03-08, 04:56 AM

Wrong. Many HDMI receivers are HDMI 1.1, such as my Denon 4306.

1.1 is all you need, since the PS3 doesn't bitstream. How about thinking before posting.

William

05-03-08, 08:21 AM

Have to be careful, some receivers only do HDMI switching, and does not handle audio over HDMI.

Hence why I said "almost all".;) I believe that all new HDMI receivers now handle audio.

Wrong. Many HDMI receivers are HDMI 1.1, such as my Denon 4306.

Your wrong is WRONG :eek: because any HDMI 1.1 and up receiver that does audio will work for player decoded TrueHD/DTS-MA/DD+/DTS-HD. The PS3 can't pass native bitstream so you CAN'T use HDMI's 1.3 bitstream (receiver/processor decoding) feature at all.

bferr1

05-03-08, 10:50 AM

Battlestar Galactica, Serenity and Children of Men in DTS-HD MA! :D

skibum5000

05-03-08, 03:53 PM

That would require playing all 6 tracks at once! :eek:

that's not how you run your 5.1 HT???
I always play six language tracks at once, running one track into each speaker, although usually the one going to the subwoofer I can't understand dialog very well from even when I undertstand the language....

strange you don't, but to each their own I guess....

skibum5000

05-03-08, 03:56 PM

Cheap is not the way to go with an AVR. The AVR is the HEART of your sound quality. I'd take a high end AVR with DD over some cheap piece of crap with DTS-HD MA any day of the week. NEVER skimp on your amp.

never skimp on your speakers moreso i would say

anyway if you run your HT from a PC you can use a top end analog card with replaced opamps and then get away with skimping on the AVR and get rather nice sound for much less than a top end $3500 AVR.

skibum5000

05-03-08, 03:58 PM

Well all the audio tracks within the feature run at the same time and occupy bandwidth. By choosing tracks, you simply choose one of the tracks running in the background.

interesting

Brian81

05-03-08, 05:59 PM

TwinTurboZX

05-03-08, 07:24 PM

did it ever occur to you that this is a studio decision? universal has decided to add dts-hd soundtracks to the new releases on bd. doesn't mean that they couldn't have added them to the hd dvds if they wanted to. there's hd dvds with dts hd and true hd. just because a company throws out a product with little effort doesn't mean it's because of the format it was on. unless universal clearly states that they used dd+ due to space restrictions, this is speculation.

Yes, let's continue to stick our heads in the sand. As far as confirmation of spec limitations look no further than Paramount, they admitted it with the Transformers release. I wonder why only 20% of HDDVD releases have lossless while about 65% of Blu-ray releases (almost 100% from non-neutral studios) include lossless. Yeah, I guess all the HDDVD studios were just being lazy. :rolleyes: HDDVD was clearly a gimped format, end of discussion.

Brian81

05-03-08, 07:46 PM

Yes, let's continue to stick our heads in the sand. As far as confirmation of spec limitations look no further than Paramount, they admitted it with the Transformers release. I wonder why only 20% of HDDVD releases have lossless while about 65% of Blu-ray releases (almost 100% from non-neutral studios) include lossless. Yeah, I guess all the HDDVD studios were just being lazy. :rolleyes: HDDVD was clearly a gimped format, end of discussion.

why is everything bad about an hd dvd release due to some sort of technical limitation? the studio very well could have been cheaping it out. like they used hd15 discs for some releases. that's being lazy and cheap. there's titles out there like pan's labyrinth with dts hd-ma and plenty of extras, all on a 30gb disc. if it could be done here, it could have been done on other titles as well. go ahead and post a list for me of the actual storage amounts for bd releases. i remember seeing a list here before. i'd like to see how much of the actual disc capacity is being used.

and there weren't that many hd dvd studios.

universal - lazy, using old masters for previous dvd releases
warner - they're still putting standard dd on upcoming bd only releases
paramount - not sure what to say about them

other smaller studios don't count for much. some (weinstein, image, etc) were using primarily lossless.

bplewis24

05-03-08, 08:06 PM

unless universal clearly states that they used dd+ due to space restrictions, this is speculation.

There are easier ways to determine it...not to mention more practical. But I think the salient point is that we no longer have to worry about it, and that's a good thing.

Anyhow, here's the list you were requesting with disc usage in it: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=760714

Brandon

Faceless Rebel

05-03-08, 08:07 PM

TwinTurboZX

05-03-08, 08:10 PM

why is everything bad about an hd dvd release due to some sort of technical limitation? the studio very well could have been cheaping it out. like they used hd15 discs for some releases. that's being lazy and cheap. there's titles out there like pan's labyrinth with dts hd-ma and plenty of extras, all on a 30gb disc. if it could be done here, it could have been done on other titles as well. go ahead and post a list for me of the actual storage amounts for bd releases. i remember seeing a list here before. i'd like to see how much of the actual disc capacity is being used.

and there weren't that many hd dvd studios.

universal - lazy, using old masters for previous dvd releases
warner - they're still putting standard dd on upcoming bd only releases
paramount - not sure what to say about them

other smaller studios don't count for much. some (weinstein, image, etc) were using primarily lossless.

Again I repeat, only 20% of HDDVD releases have lossless while about 65% of Blu-ray releases (almost 100% from non-neutral studios) include lossless. This is not a coincidence. Now, let's see what Paramount, the studio that was paid to exclusively support HDDVD, had to say about the matter.

http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/1110/transformers.html
Indeed, I had the opportunity to attend a special 'Transformers' media event with Paramount late last week, and the question was asked almost immediately -- why no Dolby TrueHD or uncompressed PCM? The studio's answer was that due to space limitations on the disc, the decision was made to limit the audio to Dolby Digital-Plus 5.1 Surround only (here at 1.5mbps). Unfortunately, this confirms the long-held theory that the 30Gb capacity of an HD-30 dual-layer HD DVD disc has forced studios to choose between offering a robust supplements package (as they've done here) and the very best in audio quality. :eek::eek:

WOW, straight from the horse's mouth. End of discussion.

TwinTurboZX

05-03-08, 08:12 PM

Brian81

05-03-08, 08:21 PM

There are easier ways to determine it...not to mention more practical. But I think the salient point is that we no longer have to worry about it, and that's a good thing.

Anyhow, here's the list you were requesting with disc usage in it: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=760714

Brandon

Thanks.

Tom Monahan

05-03-08, 08:33 PM

Take it easy on these former HDDVD supporters, they just found out the format that they poured all that money into was indeed gimped from the start. Of course, us Blu-ray supporters knew that all along hence our support for the superior format. I guess the designers of HDDVD forgot that a next generation home video format should accommodate both high def video AND SOUND. Pure comedy! :D

I have been a dual format owner since both formats were released and cared less who won the format war. I have been enjoying many many Universal HD DVD's since the beginning. Many had no lossless but I am glad I purchased so many instead of waiting up to 2 years plus to own these Universal titles on Blu-Ray. It is going to be a long time before all their HD DVD titles will be on blu so enjoy the wait. I will replace Universal titles on a case by case basis in the future. No big deal it's only money right.:) By the way, many Blu Paramount titles are inferior to it's HD DVD counterpart so make sure to enjoy those inferior releases. Some of Warner's classics like Casablanca sold so poorly on HD DVD that they may not seee the light of day on Blu. If they ever do, it's probably going to be a long time. IMHO you need to own both formats to get all the best quality titles. I still own the D-Theater format and the 30 HD titles I have still have yet to be released on HD disc.

Tom

Brian81

05-03-08, 08:45 PM

Originally Posted by Faceless Rebel
I'm impressed by the cognitive dissonance which is necessary for people to actually claim that studios purposely CHOSE not to use lossless audio on HD DVD. So tell me this, if Universal CHOSE to only use DD+ on HD DVD, why are they suddenly reversing course and choosing DTS-HDMA now? Explain that, I want to hear your genius rational explanation for why Universal would change their minds besides the obvious technical reason that Blu-ray has the storage size and bitrate to more easily accomodate lossless audio.

Hah, you're just gonna get the new standard HDDVD apologists' talking point about how Universal just wants previous owners to double dip on the titles. LOL!!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm not going to sit here and claim to know Universal's reasons for using DD+ instead of DolbyTrueHD on many of their releases. I honestly don't know - but yet you can both claim to know the exact reasons for why they used DD+ by making assumptions, using comments about a release from a completely different studio, and a change in codec choices from Dolby to DTS, which the latter wasn't even used by Universal at all other than for a handful of their very first releases in '06.

FilmMixer

05-03-08, 09:20 PM

I'm impressed by the cognitive dissonance which is necessary for people to actually claim that studios purposely CHOSE not to use lossless audio on HD DVD. So tell me this, if Universal CHOSE to only use DD+ on HD DVD, why are they suddenly reversing course and choosing DTS-HDMA now? Explain that......

Let me try...

If Dolby offered a mandatory format that offered a higher bit rate than 640, this thread wouldn't exist.

Universal and Paramount, despite what other reasons existed on HD DVD about space and bandwidth, were plenty happy with the transparency of DD+ at 1.5... I've had discussions with the responsible parties from both parties.... They have, in the last year or so, taken a different approach on who does the mastering for audio on features, and it is a very welcome change... I also have a feeling this change facilitated their move to lossless on all titles.

I just finished a film for Universal, so I think I have a good insight into what they are thinking :cool:

I find it so funny that people start a thread about a codec.. I didn't see any threads for Paramount when they recently announced their titles using TrueHD or Disney's choice of PCM on most titles... Would this thread exist if they had been able to with TureHD or PCM? I doubt it.

DTS never claimed audible superiority to Dolby TrueHD or PCM (I can see the marketing guys now.... "DTS HD MA ---- EVEN BETTER THAN THE ORIGINAL):rolleyes:

They sell their codec on less complex encoding hardware requirements, single pass encodes, speaker remapping, downmix metadata, higher available core rates, etc...

On the same train of thought, has anyone here ever asked anyone from Dolby or DTS if they think there is an audible advantage in their lossless encodes over their lossy 1.5mbps encoder products in regards to 24/48 5.1 or 7.1 film soundtracks?

I think their answers would surprise most here..

Steve Burke

05-03-08, 10:32 PM

I have been a dual format owner since both formats were released and cared less who won the format war. I have been enjoying many many Universal HD DVD's since the beginning. Many had no lossless but I am glad I purchased so many instead of waiting up to 2 years plus to own these Universal titles on Blu-Ray. It is going to be a long time before all their HD DVD titles will be on blu so enjoy the wait. I will replace Universal titles on a case by case basis in the future. No big deal it's only money right.:) By the way, many Blu Paramount titles are inferior to it's HD DVD counterpart so make sure to enjoy those inferior releases. Some of Warner's classics like Casablanca sold so poorly on HD DVD that they may not seee the light of day on Blu. If they ever do, it's probably going to be a long time. IMHO you need to own both formats to get all the best quality titles. I still own the D-Theater format and the 30 HD titles I have still have yet to be released on HD disc.

I really agree with this. IMO you need to be the owner of 4 formats: Blu-Ray, HD-DVD, regular DVD, and laserdisc.

For example, if I want to watch Heat, Jurassic Park or Amadeus, my choice would be laserdisc because the audio quality is very important to those movies, and so far laserdisc offers the best audio for those, by far.

If I want to watch The Boy Who Could Fly or Name of the Rose, then regular DVD offers the best combination of PQ and AQ.

If I want to watch Moody Blues Lovely to See You Tonight or Heart Alive In Seattle the HD-DVD has the best versions.

I know I don't want to wait 6 months or longer for those to come out on Blu-Ray. Some of those may never be released.

Majestyk

05-03-08, 11:22 PM

Cheap is not the way to go with an AVR. The AVR is the HEART of your sound quality. I'd take a high end AVR with DD over some cheap piece of crap with DTS-HD MA any day of the week. NEVER skimp on your amp.

Agreed! What's the point in getting a cheap receiver with DTS-HD MA when it's just going to sound more like lossy DD?

wco81

05-03-08, 11:32 PM

AVR?

What about speakers?

Faceless Rebel

05-03-08, 11:36 PM

The speakers matter too, but the receiver is what drives the speakers. If you buy $5,000 worth of speakers and drive them with a $100 receiver, it won't sound good no matter what you do.

Balance is what is key in outfitting a home theater system. You need to allocate your budget in a manner such that you get a good, reasonable quality receiver and good, reasonable quality speakers.

Faceless Rebel

05-03-08, 11:48 PM

If Dolby offered a mandatory format that offered a higher bit rate than 640, this thread wouldn't exist.

This is ultimately not Dolby's fault. I thought the whole point of DD+ was that the nature of DD's encoding process limits it to a max bitrate of 640kbps? I'm sure at the time they were nailing down the DD spec for DVD, that was thought to be plenty adequate considering the limitations of the DVD format.

Universal and Paramount, despite what other reasons existed on HD DVD about space and bandwidth, were plenty happy with the transparency of DD+ at 1.5... I've had discussions with the responsible parties from both parties.... They have, in the last year or so, taken a different approach on who does the mastering for audio on features, and it is a very welcome change... I also have a feeling this change facilitated their move to lossless on all titles.

This is a non-answer and is evasion of my question. If Universal and Paramount were happy with the transparency of DD+ 1.5mbps on HD DVD, why the change to lossless audio tracks on Blu-ray? I understand that there are different outfits out there for the mastering of audio, but I fail to see how that relates to the decision to use lossy versus lossless codec, it's not as if one outfit only masters in lossy and another only in lossless, they all do as the studios request and pay them to do.

Furthermore Paramount has publicly stated on the record that they wanted to include a lossless soundtrack with Transformers but chose to cut it due to space constraints. How can anybody argue with that?

I just finished a film for Universal, so I think I have a good insight into what they are thinking :cool:

While I always show respect for industry insiders who spend their time here, the reality is that everyone has an agenda (Amir is proof enough of that) and I do apologize if I take everything insiders say here with a few grains of salt. It's nothing personal. :)

bplewis24

05-04-08, 12:05 AM

:(@Turning this into a Format War thread.

Brandon

TwinTurboZX

05-04-08, 12:41 AM

This is a non-answer and is evasion of my question. If Universal and Paramount were happy with the transparency of DD+ 1.5mbps on HD DVD, why the change to lossless audio tracks on Blu-ray? I understand that there are different outfits out there for the mastering of audio, but I fail to see how that relates to the decision to use lossy versus lossless codec, it's not as if one outfit only masters in lossy and another only in lossless, they all do as the studios request and pay them to do.

Yeah no kidding... DD+ is so transparent to the master that Dolby decided it was worth the time and money to develop TrueHD. :rolleyes:

lgans316

05-04-08, 12:51 AM

:(@Turning this into a Format War thread.

Brandon

+1. Let's wait and watch on how Universal delivers their first set of titles on BD and then argue:(

shadowrage

05-04-08, 01:45 AM

Yeah no kidding... DD+ is so transparent to the master that Dolby decided it was worth the time and money to develop TrueHD. :rolleyes:

So the MA tracks wouldn't get lazy. Burn.

As a side note- The format war is over, viva la codec revolution. Damn. Just be happy we are getting lossless tracks at all. Then get your tissues ready, because these happen to be MA lossless tracks(not that there's anything wrong with TrueHD).:)

FilmMixer

05-04-08, 02:16 AM

Yeah no kidding... DD+ is so transparent to the master that Dolby decided it was worth the time and money to develop TrueHD. :rolleyes:

Once again, what is a company supposed to do when they are faced with competition on HDM's ability to include PCM and DTS develops DTS-HD MA.

They're a business, and in it to make money.

And since you know so much, you would also know that DTHD was developed out of MLP, which is used on DVD-A... it is not a new technology, but an enhancement of an existing one :rolleyes:

Dave Mack

05-04-08, 02:48 AM

But even more exciting...and anxiously awaiting news on some classic Universal gems that never even made it to red,
like Gladiator, Jurassic Park! and Indiana Jones

Indy is paramount.

:)

FilmMixer

05-04-08, 03:00 AM

This is ultimately not Dolby's fault. I thought the whole point of DD+ was that the nature of DD's encoding process limits it to a max bitrate of 640kbps? I'm sure at the time they were nailing down the DD spec for DVD, that was thought to be plenty adequate considering the limitations of the DVD format.

Dolby has never claimed DD at 448 or 640 was transparent to the master.. it was adequate yes, and was never sold as anything else.

I never put the blame on Dolby's door step... I know that the studios asked for the ability to have DD+ at a higher bitrate on Blu Ray.. contrary to what people think about the tech merits of BR, CBR audio still has advantages over VBR , and it will become even more apparent as more and more BD live titles come out.

This is a non-answer and is evasion of my question. If Universal and Paramount were happy with the transparency of DD+ 1.5mbps on HD DVD, why the change to lossless audio tracks on Blu-ray? I understand that there are different outfits out there for the mastering of audio, but I fail to see how that relates to the decision to use lossy versus lossless codec, it's not as if one outfit only masters in lossy and another only in lossless, they all do as the studios request and pay them to do.

I did answer your question... You cannot do DD+ at 1.5 or 3.0 at this time on BR.. it isn't in the spec for primary audio.

If I confused you point about encodes or authoring, I apologize. However,
there are many here that assert that DTS or Dolby use different masters, or tweak the encodes somehow.. my point is to point out that neither company is responsible for the encodes you hear on BR.

We agree on those points.

Furthermore Paramount has publicly stated on the record that they wanted to include a lossless soundtrack with Transformers but chose to cut it due to space constraints. How can anybody argue with that?

Paramount never said they wanted to put lossless on because it sounded better.

While I always show respect for industry insiders who spend their time here, the reality is that everyone has an agenda (Amir is proof enough of that) and I do apologize if I take everything insiders say here with a few grains of salt. It's nothing personal. :)

What is my agenda? I wonk for no studio, sell no product, have professional relationships with both Dolby and DTS (I have recently been in touch with both companies helping bring to light issues with both codecs and equipments.) I've been critical of both companies in public on here in the past .. do you think I like getting those emails and phone calls?

Ever time I stick my neck out and post about what my real world experiences are, I get accused of having an agenda.. I was very pro-HD DVD when it was around as I thought the winner would be decided on price, network connectivity (2.0 wasn't a reality until recently) and ease of manufacturing.. I was wrong, and admitted at the time I had a bias for HD DVD because of those things.. but a bias doesn't indicate an agenda...

Amir and most of the others that are categorized as insiders either had a direct affiliation with a company doing business in HT or were technology providers to HD DVD or BR...

I am unique in the respect that I am one of the only members on AVS that represents the creative community as a creator of content.. the mixes of my films are my mixes, so I have a little different perspective....

So once again, please tell me what my agenda is? To back up my strong opinions with real world experience in the hopes of gaining what?

Trust me... soon enough there will be other members on this thread telling me to give it a rest, and to stop all of my preaching... and as always, the mob mentality of like minded members without any science or personal knowledge to back it up will start in with the attacks.. happens every time.. there's safety in numbers.

And there's nothing wrong with an opinion...

I don't take it personally.. however, if you haven't compared the codecs one to one, or heard the masters, your comments are much more suspect than mine, thank you very much. I have 18 years of experience in the film sound community, and have been involved with digital sound for cinema and the home as much as anyone in my line of work..

You conclude that lossless codecs exist because they sound better than high bit rate lossy.. I'll argue the point that they exist because both Dolby and DTS are in business to make money and stay competitive with not only each other, but PCM.

It also stops this argument about the transparency of their lossy, and let's them get onto what they do best, which is sell technology and licenses.

The existence of lossless doesn't concede the argument that you can or can't tell the difference between the HBR lossy and lossless in a level matched AB...

I'll be putting my money where my mouth is... I will be hosting an AVS get together in October at my studio in Los Angeles.. I will have access to the masters, lossy and lossless encodes of various titles.... there will be plenty of posters around here who will be able to tell you how well they are able to pick the lossy vs lossless encodes...

lgans316

05-04-08, 03:05 AM

Terrific explanation FilmMixer.

Hughmc

05-04-08, 04:35 AM

I really agree with this. IMO you need to be the owner of 4 formats: Blu-Ray, HD-DVD, regular DVD, and laserdisc.

For example, if I want to watch Heat, Jurassic Park or Amadeus, my choice would be laserdisc because the audio quality is very important to those movies, and so far laserdisc offers the best audio for those, by far.

If I want to watch The Boy Who Could Fly or Name of the Rose, then regular DVD offers the best combination of PQ and AQ.

If I want to watch Moody Blues Lovely to See You Tonight or Heart Alive In Seattle the HD-DVD has the best versions.

I know I don't want to wait 6 months or longer for those to come out on Blu-Ray. Some of those may never be released.

Fine for some but I call BS here. It isn't about need, but about want. You said need at in your first sentence and then said want as that is what it really is about. While I enjoy different sources and do watch BD and DVD and cable, etc. there is only so much time and ability for anyone to watch only so much. One could own every format and still never see most of what they could no matter how much they want or "need" to see.

UxiSXRD

05-04-08, 04:37 AM

Dolby has never claimed DD at 448 or 640 was transparent to the master.. it was adequate yes, and was never sold as anything else.

Dolby's never claimed DD+ was transparent to the master, either, IIRC, though certain HDDVD-partisan insiders have claimed that.

Roger was fairly explicit back in the day that DD+ was created to address the shortcomings of the DVD-inherited structure that would have otherwise limited HDDVD to 448k. He was also clear that he thought it was decidedly miniscule returns on any increase in bitrate from the 640k normal DD max for a 5.1 track.

I was wrong, and admitted at the time I had a bias for HD DVD because of those things.. but a bias doesn't indicate an agenda...

Not by itself, but often where there's smoke, there's fire and many less professional people let their bias set their agenda. I should be clear that don't believe that, of you specifically (at least that I've seen), though.

I am unique in the respect that I am one of the only members on AVS that represents the creative community as a creator of content.. the mixes of my films are my mixes, so I have a little different perspective....

Could you say what the general leaning is amongst your peers in the industry, assuming you've discussed or heard which way the wind is blowing? Would your opinion be amongst the consensus or the dissent and is there much of either. Just off the cuff... nothing need be written in blood as "FilmMixer says" or any such. :D

The existence of lossless doesn't concede the argument that you can or can't tell the difference between the HBR lossy and lossless in a level matched AB...

Sure, but as enthusiasts our goal whenever possible should be that our own mark I ear is the cause of any possible disturbances and abnormalities from the intended presentation, instead of our equipment.

More detailed, we know that to appreciate lossless audio depends on 3 factors: 1) the ear, 2) the gear, and 3) the room. For #1, barring professional training and experience coupled with proficiency, we can't do anything about that. The room is not as flexible for most of the posters on this board, who are using living room, apartment, etc type environments. Many are content with auto-calibration like Audyssey and the like and a few of us have done ISF/HAA and all that. The elite have calibrated dedicated theaters with top of the line equipment and can well solve 2 of the 3.

Opposite this, is the 'good enough' philosophy that would have keep the mass market in DVD... but for it's irrevocably broken and unsalvagable DRM.

Steve Burke

05-04-08, 04:42 AM

What is my agenda? I wonk for no studio, sell no product, have professional relationships with both Dolby and DTS (I have recently been in touch with both companies helping bring to light issues with both codecs and equipments.) I've been critical of both companies in public on here in the past

OK I am going to take a stab at this as someone who knows nothing about what goes on behind the scene. My guess is that it takes knowledge, skill, training and experience to produce a good quality lossy track, but it takes little to none to produce a lossless track since it is just an identical copy of the original. Therefore you are more marketable if BD uses lossy.

Dolby has never claimed DD at 448 or 640 was transparent to the master.. it was adequate yes, and was never sold as anything else.

For 10 years, I tolerated the junk that is 448 DD. Yes Dolby is all about making money. When it comes to quality, it has little creditability in my eyes. It was made worse because many of us knew how good laserdisc PCM sounded before it came along.

I wish someone would take PCM and invent a compression scheme for it and place it in the public domain. When it comes to lossless, companies like Dolby or DTS add little value, except possibly for the DTS core.

Faceless Rebel

05-04-08, 04:53 AM

Steve Burke

05-04-08, 04:59 AM

Steve Burke

05-04-08, 05:10 AM

In order to satisfy the grammar police, I am retyping my previous post, changing every instance of "need" to "want". Of course everything here is just entertainment, so nothing is a need.

-----

I really agree with this. IMO you want to be the owner of 4 formats: Blu-Ray, HD-DVD, regular DVD, and laserdisc.

For example, if I want to watch Heat, Jurassic Park or Amadeus, my choice would be laserdisc because the audio quality is very important to those movies, and so far laserdisc offers the best audio for those, by far.

If I want to watch The Boy Who Could Fly or Name of the Rose, then regular DVD offers the best combination of PQ and AQ.

If I want to watch Moody Blues Lovely to See You Tonight or Heart Alive In Seattle the HD-DVD has the best versions.

I know I don't want to wait 6 months or longer for those to come out on Blu-Ray. Some of those may never be released.

The bottom line is that if I am going to give up 2 hours of my life watching something, I want to make it worth my while.

FilmMixer

05-04-08, 12:01 PM

Dolby's never claimed DD+ was transparent to the master, either, IIRC, though certain HDDVD-partisan insiders have claimed that.

Roger was fairly explicit back in the day that DD+ was created to address the shortcomings of the DVD-inherited structure that would have otherwise limited HDDVD to 448k. He was also clear that he thought it was decidedly miniscule returns on any increase in bitrate from the 640k normal DD max for a 5.1 track.

The tools that measure the difference between the master and a lossy encode reports their is 1/10 of 1 percent audible difference between a 1.5 DD+ track and the master....

Did you ever ask Roger if DD+ at 1.5 was considered transparent to the master. ;)

Could you say what the general leaning is amongst your peers in the industry, assuming you've discussed or heard which way the wind is blowing? Would your opinion be amongst the consensus or the dissent and is there much of either. Just off the cuff... nothing need be written in blood as "FilmMixer says" or any such. :D

If you can believe it, most of my peers have not kept up with the home theater stuff as it pertains to the new audio codecs... the other mixers that do tend to feel the same way I do... not all, but most.

Once again, though, I've had many discussions with Dolby and DTS about their findings and test.. I can't speak for them, but I think it safe to say my opinion isn't in the minority.

I've also talked with several studio people about their findings, and my posts have shed light on what they feel on several occasions in the past.

Sure, but as enthusiasts our goal whenever possible should be that our own mark I ear is the cause of any possible disturbances and abnormalities from the intended presentation, instead of our equipment.

More detailed, we know that to appreciate lossless audio depends on 3 factors: 1) the ear, 2) the gear, and 3) the room. For #1, barring professional training and experience coupled with proficiency, we can't do anything about that. The room is not as flexible for most of the posters on this board, who are using living room, apartment, etc type environments. Many are content with auto-calibration like Audyssey and the like and a few of us have done ISF/HAA and all that. The elite have calibrated dedicated theaters with top of the line equipment and can well solve 2 of the 3.

Opposite this, is the 'good enough' philosophy that would have keep the mass market in DVD... but for it's irrevocably broken and unsalvagable DRM.

I disagree with your last point.. the studios will jump at any chance to make money, broken DRM or not. :cool:

FilmMixer

05-04-08, 12:20 PM

OK I am going to take a stab at this as someone who knows nothing about what goes on behind the scene. My guess is that it takes knowledge, skill, training and experience to produce a good quality lossy track, but it takes little to none to produce a lossless track since it is just an identical copy of the original. Therefore you are more marketable if BD uses lossy.

For 10 years, I tolerated the junk that is 448 DD. Yes Dolby is all about making money. When it comes to quality, it has little creditability in my eyes. It was made worse because many of us knew how good laserdisc PCM sounded before it came along.

I wish someone would take PCM and invent a compression scheme for it and place it in the public domain. When it comes to lossless, companies like Dolby or DTS add little value, except possibly for the DTS core.

First off, there is nothing you can do when encoding, there is no art to it.. you feed it a signal, and go to town... lossy is CBR, so you have as much control over what comes out as when you rip a CD in iTunes.

Lossless VBR is going to be defined by having to get the same PCM word out of the encoder that went in... with DTS, the only control you have over size is what rate the core is encoded at, and the extension rate will be different because of that, but I would imagine the difference is negligible...

Video is VBR on BR, and there are controls in the authoring tools to cap the data rate if needed.. HDCAM-SR, which is a popular format right now for HD storage, has a data rate of 440Mbps if I recall correctly.... that's a lot of data to squeeze into a MPEG2, AVC or VC-1 encode, at much greater compression ratios than any of the lossy audio codecs.. not apples to apples, true.

We can debate the merits of either company.. they have both provided a level of standardization and tools that are imperative in my line of work. And each of their lossless codecs offer tools that some find important in my business.. speaker remapping, 7.1>5.1 downmix, dialog norm and DRC, etc.

PCM did sound great on LD.. but I'm a 5.1 guy. :cool:

FilmMixer

05-04-08, 12:30 PM

Umm, the studio master, the theater mix, and the consumer mix are all mixed at different levels to match the equipment they are likely to be heard on. None are identical copies of the others. The mix you hear on a DVD or Blu-ray disc is not the same as the one you heard in the theaters, and neither are the same as the studio's master. Somebody had to mix these soundtracks and set the levels. This job is the same whether the soundtrack is lossy or lossless.

That is not entirely correct.

The studio master and the theatrical mix are the same thing.. we make that when we "printmaster" (make the master that goes on the print) and create a 5.1 (or 6.1 if doing an EX type format) 24/48 LPCM master, usually in the .bwav (broadcast wave) file format.

Some times, as was the case with Paramount and Universal until recently, for example, that same master was used for home video encoding.

For the most part, studios are doing near field mixes for HV release, but not always... this is a recent change in regards to all of the studios having that policy.

And the levels don't change automatically when mixing in a near field environment.... the SPL reference does (it goes down for HT), but you don't want to stray to far off of the original levels because the dynamic range and headroom will get destroyed... This process is one of the most mis-understood here on AVS..

I just did the HT mix for "Baby Mama.." I made two changes to the mix from the master.. levels are exactly the same.

vancouver

05-04-08, 01:10 PM

The tools that measure the difference between the master and a lossy encode reports their is 1/10 of 1 percent audible difference between a 1.5 DD+ track and the master....

:

Thats actually pretty amazing. I mean with all the threads and arguments that have gone on on the topic of DD+ and loss-less the equipment which scientifically measures (not subjectively measures) only shows a 1/10 of 1% audible difference?

LMAO at all the people who invested so much time arguing and posting on the differences.

scowl

05-04-08, 01:29 PM

I wish someone would take PCM and invent a compression scheme for it and place it in the public domain.
Isn't that what FLAC (http://flac.sourceforge.net/) is?

wakashizuma

05-04-08, 01:31 PM

Isn't that what FLAC (http://flac.sourceforge.net/) is?

Precisely!

Dan Hitchman

05-04-08, 01:45 PM

FilmMixer

05-04-08, 02:27 PM

Steve Burke

05-04-08, 02:43 PM

Thats actually pretty amazing. I mean with all the threads and arguments that have gone on on the topic of DD+ and loss-less the equipment which scientifically measures (not subjectively measures) only shows a 1/10 of 1% audible difference?

LMAO at all the people who invested so much time arguing and posting on the differences.

Even assuming that is the case for every listener under every possible circumstance, where do you find 1.5 DD+ on BD?

cueCrew

05-04-08, 02:56 PM

Just think, eventually you may be able to buy a copy of King Kong on BD with DTS-HD MA that is even LONGER!!

Dan Hitchman

05-04-08, 03:15 PM

Dan... I just got to work, and would love to answer your post in detail, especially since Mi Casa referenced one of my film many times in that article ("Harold and Kumar 2")....

Mixing late today, but will reply late tonight...

Take your time in replying! LOL! You have better things to do right now, but I do appreciate your view point and candor on these subjects.

Any thoughts on the Sonoma audio workstations (the newest seem to be Direct Stream Digital based), they are used at the Super Audio Center among other places, and Ed Meitner and EMM Labs' audiophile recording and mixing products? They seem to have quite the reputation in the world of audiophile recording. www.emmlabs.com Telarc is one such recording label that seems to use Meitner's products a lot.

Just wondering how audiophile products like these could be integrated into movie soundtrack and music score audio engineering. Perhaps with media like Blu-ray that can allow for 8 channels of 24 bit/96 kHz audio or 6 channels of 24 bit/192 kHz audio in PCM or lossless this will help push movie studios to adopt better and better mixing and fidelity standards for home theaters.

I know when I'm purchasing speakers, amps, etc. I go for the best I can afford and would love media (movies, TV shows, and music) that can fully utilize their potential. Heck, I just bought not too long ago some Paradigm Studio Reference speakers (3-way Model 100 towers and their very large matching 3-way Model 690 center channel, which is a beast!-- don't have an acoustic screen right now so I had to settle for a horizontal center) for my home theater and an HSU VTF-3.3 subwoofer to pair with my existing ATI amplifier. Although, not the absolute cream of the crop (I would love to afford Wilson Watt Puppies!) I can definitely pick out which movies and SA-CD/DVD-Audio recordings sound great with wide and deep soundstaging and clear, clean vocals, and those that are a muddy, compressed, and/or imageless mess. Ah, the bane of having pretty good speakers!

The Blu-ray discs of IMAX's Chronos, Legends of Jazz Showcase, and the Tim Reynolds & Dave Matthews Radio City Music Hall concert are standouts in my collection, so far, for high resolution 24 bit/96 kHz music recordings (with video) in surround sound. The dialog clarity for The Lord of the Rings DTS 6.1 track is very, very good for the most part. I'm going back through my music disc collection now. I'm picking up nuances I've never heard before! For some stuff that's either a blessing or a curse. :)

Get to work, jeez! :D

skibum5000

05-04-08, 03:50 PM

I wish someone would take PCM and invent a compression scheme for it and place it in the public domain.

Err what about FLAC and Monkey's Audio and all those?

Not so sure those are as ideally setup for use on blu-ray and such though, but anyway, there are certainly formats out ther publically that take PCM and losslessly compress it.

Dan Hitchman

05-04-08, 03:59 PM

Even assuming that is the case for every listener under every possible circumstance, where do you find 1.5 DD+ on BD?

You can't unless it's over 6 channels. And I do remember Roger Dressler mentioning there wasn't much audible difference between DD at 640 kilobits/sec and DD+ at 1.5 Megabits/sec. There was some overhead data stuff that added to the space difference.

There are a few DTS-HD lossy 3 Megabits/sec tracks, namely through some early Lionsgate Blu-ray discs, like Rambo and, I think, Basic Instinct.

I guess I'm of the opinion that you might as well deliver 24 bit/48 kHz and above lossless tracks on all titles. Doesn't hurt, and you most certainly have the room on Blu-ray now to include high res. audio AND high bitrate video.

Steve Burke

05-04-08, 04:09 PM

I know when I'm purchasing speakers, amps, etc. I go for the best I can afford and would love media (movies, TV shows, and music) that can fully utilize their potential. Heck, I just bought not too long ago some Paradigm Studio Reference speakers (3-way Model 100 towers and their very large matching 3-way Model 690 center channel, which is a beast!-- don't have an acoustic screen right now so I had to settle for a horizontal center) for my home theater and an HSU VTF-3.3 subwoofer to pair with my existing ATI amplifier. Although, not the absolute cream of the crop (I would love to afford Wilson Watt Puppies!)

I am currently researching speakers, and it started out with 3 Onix xl-s for the bedroom system, total of $523, primarily because my wife thinks they are cute. Somewhere along the way I decided that I am going to replace my home theater front 3 speakers also, and I am considering the Monitor Audio Platinum PL300 for $14K. In audio circles this is not even considered a high-end speaker.

I don't know how I am going to justify to my wife going from spending $523 to $14K, but it puts into perspective how inexpensive things like Blu-Ray players are. IMO of all the home theater components, speakers is a bottomless pit.

Dan Hitchman

05-04-08, 04:27 PM

I am currently researching speakers, and it started out with 3 Onix xl-s for the bedroom system, total of $523, primarily because my wife thinks they are cute. Somewhere along the way I decided that I am going to replace my home theater front 3 speakers also, and I am considering the Monitor Audio Platinum PL300 for $14K. In audio circles this is not even considered a high-end speaker.

I don't know how I am going to justify to my wife going from spending $523 to $14K, but it puts into perspective how inexpensive things like Blu-Ray players are. IMO of all the home theater components, speakers is a bottomless pit.

Although, with speakers if you invest in good quality for the money and are happy with them you won't be changing them out very soon like you do TV's, processors, players, etc. (commodity items that are usually built to fail). Same with power amplifiers. Get a solid, quality product and it will last for years.

William

05-04-08, 07:18 PM

I am currently researching speakers, and it started out with 3 Onix xl-s for the bedroom system, total of $523, primarily because my wife thinks they are cute. Somewhere along the way I decided that I am going to replace my home theater front 3 speakers also, and I am considering the Monitor Audio Platinum PL300 for $14K. In audio circles this is not even considered a high-end speaker....

With speakers specs mean noting and price means little (although cabinet quality and workmanship can be effected). Your subjective opinion is by far the main concern when selecting any transducer. You need to be happy with the type of sound they produce. From personal experience (buying the wrong type for myself in the past) you should spend as much time listening with your most familiar CD's before deciding.

UxiSXRD

05-04-08, 09:29 PM

Did you ever ask Roger if DD+ at 1.5 was considered transparent to the master. ;)

No, but someone else did. ;) He replied (http://archive2.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=8210881&&#post8210881):

Dolby never claims its lossy codecs are transparent. I have been very clear about that. (They often sound transparent, though…)

He also stated in the same thread:

. It is not necessary in our view to use even 1 Mbps until 7.1-ch is available, but it’s their choice to make, and it certainly will not hurt the sound...

To keep it in context, he also says that full bitrate (640k) DD can also "sound" transparent in a specific context. I doubt any of us would claim any lossy codec sounds transparent all the time. Maybe even not most of the time. We know that lossless is absolutely transparent all of the time, regardless of how it sounds and that's the context of my argument and what should be the standard in any high definition movie.

I’m sure we can find some challenging program material that will show 1.5 Mbps has some subtle advantage over 640 kbps in a clinical situation, but that does not mean 640 doesn’t sound transparent on most material, most of the time, for most users.

Great thread (that you yourself participated in) from the AVS that I loved enough to subscribe to, though I almost entirely lurked the high def forums at that time, since I hadn't experienced it myself, much less formed opinions based on said experiences. The Insiders were well challenged and mostly respectfully. Unfortunately, we haven't seen this sort of back and forth in awhile, if it's even allowed anymore.

rlindo

05-04-08, 10:26 PM

Nice...now that the PS3 can decode DTS-MA and I can actually enjoy those tracks, I am all for studios using the codec now.:) Anyway, it is good to hear that universal will apparently have lossless on most of their releases, well at least on the new releases for sure. I have quite a few universal hd-dvds and I'd think there are only a couple that I would possibly re-buy in bluray (kong, U-571 off the top of my head) for the lossless audio, assuming it was a noticeable upgrade.

Shame this thread started to go into some format war crap but hey, it's what I expect here based on the maturity level of some members of AVS. Sad some (and that means people on both "sides") just can't let it go...

vancouver

05-05-08, 12:20 AM

I want to replace my remaining 30 or so HD DVDs when the BD version comes out to remove a player form my rack. Universal re-releasing their tittles with DTS MA just makes the transition that much easier.

FilmMixer

05-05-08, 02:12 AM

I guess I'm of the opinion that you might as well deliver 24 bit/48 kHz and above lossless tracks on all titles. Doesn't hurt, and you most certainly have the room on Blu-ray now to include high res. audio AND high bitrate video.

Dan... I share the same opinion.

lgans316

05-05-08, 02:45 AM

zBuff

05-05-08, 02:54 AM

Aren't alot of those movies recorded in the analog realm?

FilmMixer

05-05-08, 03:12 AM

FilmMixer,

Can you address some of the concerns the engineers at Mi Casa were talking about in the latest issue of Widescreen Review that when they go through copies of the master digital stems package they are given by the studios they are finding all sorts of audio problems (random noises, distortions, shuffling, ADR looping and environmental/spacial integration problems, etc.) that are possibly not picked up on when mixing for a very large commercial theater venue and more P.A. like speakers that they seemingly have to weed out and filter and adjust for in their 24 bit near field mixes?

Dan... I have had many projects go through Mi Casa. They are a unique company with a unique business model, and provide a service that is usually handled by the studios themselves.. Sony, Fox, Disney, Universal and Paramount all handle remastering on their titles with few exceptions.

Mi Casa's main clients are New Line and Lionsgate.. two companies I've mixed films for. Mi Casa is also unique in that they do their own encoding.

They are big proponents of 7.1 discrete.

There are always going to be issues like bad punches or ADR that sticks out.. the article makes it seem like they are saving all of us poor mixers from ourselves.... but think about this.... outside of Lionsgate and New Line products, how many titles have you heard where you all of those things they "fix" are egregious? Do you listen to a lossless/PCM disc from Disney and say "Wow, there's a lot of (pick your poison) on the dialog track?" They make it sound like they are saving the mix, and those who don't do the kind of forensic work they make a living on are doomed to audio mediocrity.

I beg to differ, and if you listen to the A-tier titles that are released by the major studios outside of NL and LGF's, you will find that they do just fine without that kind of triage.

Trust me.. I know what my ADR will sound like at home, and it won't always be pretty... ;) And a lot of times the shuffling sound you hear in dialog comes from production and you are tied to it.. I can't always fix it, and they have some great tools, but there are a lot of things you can't escape when dealing with production sound.

Which brings me to my next point... I find a very basic flaw in their philosophy. They take the dialog stem, for example, and start "fixing" all of these problems. But the dialog stem only works as part of the entire mix, and all of the stems are balanced against one another for a cohesive sound.. you start removing shuffling sounds, for instance, and have no idea that the background sound effects were mixed to compensate for that.. if you weren't on the mixing stage and having those conversations, you never truly understand that cohesion. Where that methodology does work is when you have the director there to supervise the remastering, and can convey what they meant.

They talked about their idea of first having the movie sound engineers designing the high resolution mix for a very good (I would assume audiophile grade and professionally and acoustically designed & dedicated home theater listening room) and very accurate 7.1 channel home theater environment (they discuss their preferred 8 channel speaker layout in the magazine article too for a balanced 360 degree effect) and then working from that ultimate "clean" mix backwards to do the less demanding commercial theater mix so these audio glitch issues don't keep getting missed and popping up.

I could see their point because you could more easily hear these problems in a more intimate setting with a much lower noise floor and probaby far more accurate music-grade monitors and mixing consoles. I'd also suspect you could layer in more subtle sound effects cues that would normally get swallowed up in a large auditorium environment, but could be discerned in a good home theater environment.

I know this won't be a popular opinion, but here it goes....

While I understand their perspective, I mix movies that are meant to be heard in a theater.

There is a format for near field mixing from the beginning.. it's called TV.

I know, I know.. Home theaters are where it''s going, and more people will eventually experience the film at home.... but until cinema is dead, I'm going to keep up my snobby, elitist theater going, a film is meant to be seen in the theater mentality.. :cool:

Movies are shot and composed for the big screen, and the sound is designed to compliment that...

And Mi Casa makes the mistake of thinking we can't hear what they do.. but guess what? The last time I spoke with Brent, he let me know he had never been onto a film mix stage. If I were to solo up my dialog stem on my stage, we'd hear all of it's problems in stunning detail..

A lot of times we premix dialog on a smaller mix stage that isn't much larger than Mi Casa's mix room.. and we listen at a louder reference, which makes some problems easier to identify, and allows us to hear and put in all kinds of subtleties.

But once again, I think there are many here who would agree that there isn't alot of fault to be found with tracks that weren't remastered the way Mi Casa does... not taking away the work they do, or the sound of the New Line or Lionsgate titles... but I can cite many more examples of tracks that are just fine without that kind of attention... as a group, us mixers usually have some idea of what we're doing..

As you can see, I am at odds with their procedural thinking.... and in fairness to them, they have a business to run, and some clients share their philosophy.

Obviously, not everyone has a properly designed and dedicated theater space at home, but at least the mix that you had packaged on the HD disc (in 24 bit/96 kHz lossless at up to 8 channels) would represent the best possible auditory experience without the glitches and all the power, clarity, resolution and detail, and imaging with the excellent wrap around soundfield of a finely crafted audiophile music recording.

Except that with film, your brain is also having to anchor itself with the image, and the entire perception of sound changes... in music, you don't have to follow the logic that is dictated by what you see on the screen.. in films, there are a lot of times we have to work logically with what we see. And what we don't see, and are representing with sound, still has to follow the basic rules..

We are also tied to production sound, and are beholden to making sure the words are heard.. it shapes a lot of what we are able to do with all of the other sounds... and a lot of times, there are other sounds that come with it, which makes it a lot harder to deal with than pristine studio music recordings.

Just try and listen to any film mix, turn off your display and unplug your center channel.. I think you will find a very immersive, wrap around sound field on most films.. but as soon as you are steering at a screen, and focused on the dialog, your perception of all that changes...

To all others.. sorry for the off topic hijack... I promised Dan a response..:)

FilmMixer

05-05-08, 03:15 AM

FilmMixer,

Question for you ? Many out here mentioned that catalog titles that are 10+ years old are not recorded at a bit depth of 24-bit. Does this mean that FOX catalog titles like Predator, Commando, Ronin, The Fly, Robocop etc on Blu-ray have been upconverted to 24-bit from 16-bit and encoded ?

Aren't alot of those movies recorded in the analog realm?

Yes.. a lot of those films were mastered on 35mm Dolby SR encoded mag.. which sounds great :)

William

05-05-08, 06:33 AM

Yes.. a lot of those films were mastered on 35mm Dolby SR encoded mag.. which sounds great :)
...and a lot of films post analog (circa 1992) pre 24bit (circa 2000) are 16bit masters.

umenon

05-05-08, 06:48 AM

I hope most all the avs members realize that TrueHD and DTS-MA offer no extra resolution compared to PCM. DTS-MA purportedly takes up less space on the disc ... but most studios never capitalize on that to offer us better video rates. Instead, what you get is more previews of movies they want us to buy.

So, for now ... I couldn't care less about DTS-MA or TrueHD ... what I want to see is 7.1 channel lossless audio format utilized by a competent production engineer to leverage its full capabilities.

William

05-05-08, 06:59 AM

I hope most all the avs members realize that TrueHD and DTS-MA offer no extra resolution compared to PCM.So, for now ... I could care less about DTS-MA or TrueHD ...

You mean TrueHD/DTS-MA don't offer more resolution than the original Master? :eek: Also how much less could you care and how close to couldn't are you?:D

Paul Cordingley

05-05-08, 07:07 AM

I could care less about DTS-MA or TrueHD

Please use the phrase "I couldn't care less," since that's clearly what you mean.

umenon

05-05-08, 08:39 AM

Please use the phrase "I couldn't care less," since that's clearly what you mean.

http://incompetech.com/gallimaufry/care_less.html

/\/\

talbain

05-05-08, 09:55 AM

http://incompetech.com/gallimaufry/care_less.html

/\/\

thank you! this has been a real annoyance of mine for years.

jdmac29

05-05-08, 10:19 AM

I must admit this make me think about double dipping.
At least Universal is giving us something more than Warner ever did and Paramount.
The blu version of their movies were mostly regular DD compared to DD+ or True HD.
The 1st 2 Bourne Movies will probably be on my agenda as well as King Kong.

FilmMixer

05-05-08, 10:20 AM

...and a lot of films post analog (ceca 1992) pre 24bit (ceca 2000) are 16bit masters.

William... post analog wasn't 1992 for film.. it was more like 1995-96... and even then, most studios and post houses were still print mastering to 35mm mag, even if the stems and sources were 16bit.

It sill happens.... I just delivered a film on mag :eek:

But for those films that were print-mastered mastered digitally before 2000, I would agree with your assessment.

William

05-05-08, 11:01 AM

William... post analog wasn't 1992 for film.. it was more like 1995-96... and even then, most studios and post houses were still print mastering to 35mm mag, even if the stems and sources were 16bit.

It sill happens.... I just delivered a film on mag :eek:

But for those films that were print-mastered mastered digitally before 2000, I would agree with your assessment.

Meant to type circa (since I was guessing) but typed ceca (what ever that is).:eek: Will edit my post.

Imeldhil

05-05-08, 12:35 PM

I have my config set as 7.1 channels. so Whenever I play... say War, or 3:10 to Yuma, I get their PCM 7.1 tracks without problem.

When I play... say Golden Compass, wich is processed by the PS3 and sent as PCM, I DO get the PCM to be 7.1 too.

What you're saying is like DTS, if you have a DTS ES A/V to set it to DTS ES Matrix for the films that only bring DTS 5.1, is that it? In that case I've never tried. I don't see much point on changing a film, if it's 5.1 then it's 5.1 for me.

However, when I tried X-Men 3 wich has a DTS HD MA 6.1 I had to change the ONkyo to 6 channels to actually get it the back surrounds to work. I dunno why...

Do you mind to tell me what settings you have?

What I'm saying here is that the 605 doesn't "upgrade" the 5.1 LPCM coming from your PS3 to 7.1 as it does with bitstream codecs. But if the LPCM comes 7.1 from my PS3 the 605 just pass it 7.1.

But I must tell you, I haven't tried any DTS-MA 7.1, only 5.1 ones, so the PCM passed to my 605 have been only 5.1 ones, I assume that once I see a DTS-MA 7.1, the PS3 will decode it as a 7.1 LPCM and onbiously my 605 will pass it that way. Am I right?

Urza

05-05-08, 10:18 PM

Yes, let's continue to stick our heads in the sand. As far as confirmation of spec limitations look no further than Paramount, they admitted it with the Transformers release. I wonder why only 20% of HDDVD releases have lossless while about 65% of Blu-ray releases (almost 100% from non-neutral studios) include lossless. Yeah, I guess all the HDDVD studios were just being lazy. :rolleyes: HDDVD was clearly a gimped format, end of discussion.

Twin, you never cease to amaze me. You continue with the snide anti HDDVD comments to this day. Did you forget the war is over?

Also, Paramount admitted no such thing. This constantly gets mis quoted. Some guy went to a screening of some sort, and the guy said "Some Paramount guy" told him they used DD on Transfomers because of space limitations.

I challenge you to backup your claim with a DIRECT Paramount quote, otherwise stop repeating that nonsense.

Also, how do you explain the lack of lossless on Fools Gold,Animated Batman, and a few other future releases from WB on BD?. But but but its HDDVD's fault, oh wait, HDDVD is dead:rolleyes:

It's called being lazy, or saving a buck, but I guess it was more important to gloat, and continue the war in your mind.

captaincelluloid

05-06-08, 03:34 PM

I never saw that one coming! Great to hear.

Yes, it IS great to hear . . . . especially for those of us still using bitstream.

However, it's maybe not all that suprising that Universal would go with
DTS for a couple of reasons.

ONE -- Universal [ and Spielberg ] were the inital investors in DTS and
JURASSIC PARK was the first DTS track released to theatres.

TWO -- Universal [ and Toshiba ] as the prime movers of HD-DVD
cleverly used DTS as the gateway to adding high bit rate and lossless audio
to HD VIDEO well before there were receivers to process DD+ and TRUE HD.

Keep in mind that the first gen HD-DVD players could internally convert
DD PLUS and TRUE HD to DTS at 1.5 Mbs. It may sound
counter intuitive to go from lossless THD to lossy DTS -- or with DD+
from lossy to higher bit rate lossy -- but it did produce superior
sound much of the time. NOTE to FILMIXER. Do you concur?

Sure, lossless or uncompressed is desirable . . . . but I wasn't about to
sell off my Lexicon processor when HD-DVD came out and I'm still not about to do it until the gear doing THD and DTS-MA gets better . . . . and it will.

-30-

William

05-06-08, 04:59 PM

...It may sound
counter intuitive to go from lossless THD to lossy DTS -- or with DD+
from lossy to higher bit rate lossy -- but it did produce superior
sound much of the time...
It is technically impossible to take a lossless track and transcode/convert to perceptual lossy and then have a more accurate or "superior" sounding track than the lossless original.:eek:

Also Dolby had a fit (understandable) when they discovered what Toshiba was doing. I'm sure the lawyers on both sides were gearing up for a suit.

captaincelluloid

05-06-08, 05:51 PM

It is technically impossible to take a lossless track and transcode/convert to perceptual lossy and then have a more accurate or "superior" sounding track than the lossless original.:eek:

You are correct, sir.

However, that is not what I said.

What I said was that lossless True HD converted to lossy, albeit full bit rate, DTS "sounded better" to my trained audiophile ears than the
only other available option at the time . . . . which was DD @ 448 and sometimes 640.

I never claimed it was "more accurate" or "superior" to a lossless master
losslessly decoded.

My point was AT THE TIME this was a good option, especially
for my system, because AT THE TIME TRUE HD processors / receivers
were not common.

This point has been discussed and supported in other threads -- sorry I don't have the links -- by other folks including AMIRM.

. . . and further, this is STILL not sorted out. Even TODAY's gear is suffering from major player firmware and HDMI incompatibility issues.

Also Dolby had a fit (understandable) when they discovered what Toshiba was doing. I'm sure the lawyers on both sides were gearing up for a suit.

Thanks. I did not know that [sorry about the second Ed McMahon reference ] Not surprising Dolby was miffed . . . any more info on this?

-30-

thebland

05-06-08, 05:54 PM

Twin, you never cease to amaze me. You continue with the snide anti HDDVD comments to this day. Did you forget the war is over?

Also, Paramount admitted no such thing. This constantly gets mis quoted. Some guy went to a screening of some sort, and the guy said "Some Paramount guy" told him they used DD on Transfomers because of space limitations.

I challenge you to backup your claim with a DIRECT Paramount quote, otherwise stop repeating that nonsense.

Also, how do you explain the lack of lossless on Fools Gold,Animated Batman, and a few other future releases from WB on BD?. But but but its HDDVD's fault, oh wait, HDDVD is dead:rolleyes:

It's called being lazy, or saving a buck, but I guess it was more important to gloat, and continue the war in your mind.

Actually, Paramount did confirm sapce was the reason for DD+ on transformers. Fortunately, now that they have all the space they need and Paramount will likely never use DD+ again.

rutlian

05-06-08, 06:58 PM

I will not buy universal movies that I currently owned in HD DVD but sure I will buy those movies release in DTS HD MA provided I dont own them in HD-DVD. Nevertheless I am glad that Universal is going to use DTS HD MA. :)

TwinTurboZX

05-06-08, 11:23 PM

Actually, Paramount did confirm sapce was the reason for DD+ on transformers. Fortunately, now that they have all the space they need and Paramount will likely never use DD+ again.

No no no... You got it all wrong. You see the reason why only 20% of HDDVD releases have lossless audio is because HDDVD studios were "lazy". :rolleyes:

These HDDVD fanatics just can't admit that the technology was dead on arrival and couldn't consistently provide the full HD experience like Blu-ray is capable of. I guess it hurts their pride since they spent good money on that second rate format. At the end of the day, it doesn't matter though because Blu-ray won and the consumer didn't get the shaft by having to settle for "good enough". Full bitrate video and audio for all!! :cool:

wormraper

05-06-08, 11:29 PM

No no no... You got it all wrong. You see the reason why only 20% of HDDVD releases have lossless audio is because HDDVD studios were "lazy". :rolleyes:

These HDDVD fanatics just can't admit that the technology was dead on arrival and couldn't consistently provide the full HD experience like Blu-ray is capable of. I guess it hurts their pride since they spent good money on that second rate format. At the end of the day, it doesn't matter though because Blu-ray won and the consumer didn't get the shaft by having to settle for "good enough". Full bitrate video and audio for all!! :cool:

you remind me of those crazy old men who literally believe they are in WWII still. Wake up to TwinTurboZX the war is over!!! you don't have to continue fighting and tossing grenades. sheesh. :rolleyes:

bplewis24

05-07-08, 12:17 AM

you remind me of those crazy old men who literally believe they are in WWII still. Wake up to TwinTurboZX the war is over!!! you don't have to continue fighting and tossing grenades. sheesh. :rolleyes:

Well people should stop posting disingenuous posts as well (denying capacity had anything to do with it, etc), but it doesn't look like that will happen anytime soon either.

Brandon

FilmMixer

05-07-08, 02:07 AM

Keep in mind that the first gen HD-DVD players could internally convert
DD PLUS and TRUE HD to DTS at 1.5 Mbs. It may sound
counter intuitive to go from lossless THD to lossy DTS -- or with DD+
from lossy to higher bit rate lossy -- but it did produce superior
sound much of the time. NOTE to FILMIXER. Do you concur?

Never heard the re-encodes.. was HDMI from the start ;)

FilmMixer

05-07-08, 02:08 AM

Actually, Paramount did confirm sapce was the reason for DD+ on transformers. Fortunately, now that they have all the space they need and Paramount will likely never use DD+ again.

Jeff... you shouldn't be so sure ;)

There is something to be said about CBR codecs, and I know that there is still interest from some studios in DD+....

Faceless Rebel

05-07-08, 06:31 AM

What's the big deal about CBR audio encodes on Blu-ray, a format where the video is capped at 40mbps no matter how little of the 8mbps allocated to audio is used?

William

05-07-08, 06:38 AM

What's the big deal about CBR audio encodes on Blu-ray, a format where the video is capped at 40mbps no matter how little of the 8mbps allocated to audio is used?

I think DD+ is a great idea (for DirecTV/Dish).;)

lgans316

05-07-08, 07:56 AM

DD+ @1.5 Mbps is a good alternative for DD @640 Kbps. I think DTS 48/24 @1.5 Mbps can be featured by default instead of DD @640 Kbps.

Urza

05-07-08, 08:35 AM

Actually, Paramount did confirm sapce was the reason for DD+ on transformers. Fortunately, now that they have all the space they need and Paramount will likely never use DD+ again.

Bland your dead wrong. I have researched this to death.

This all came from an article about a guy who went to some screen test. He said that the Paramount rep told him this. In other words, second hand.

If you can find a DIRECT quote from Paramount, I will eat crow.

Not really important, I just get sick of people reporting this as fact.

Grubert

05-07-08, 10:00 AM

Bland your dead wrong. I have researched this to death.

This all came from an article about a guy who went to some screen test. He said that the Paramount rep told him this. In other words, second hand.

Whoa, holy history retelling, Batman!

It all came from the review of Transformers at one of the top HDM news and review sites (highdefdigest), after Peter Bracke (chief reviewer at HDD and former longtime editor of dvdfile) attended a special Transformers media event:

Indeed, I had the opportunity to attend a special 'Transformers' media event with Paramount late last week, and the question was asked almost immediately -- why no Dolby TrueHD or uncompressed PCM? The studio's answer was that due to space limitations on the disc, the decision was made to limit the audio to Dolby Digital-Plus 5.1 Surround only (here at 1.5mbps). Unfortunately, this confirms the long-held theory that the 30Gb capacity of an HD-30 dual-layer HD DVD disc has forced studios to choose between offering a robust supplements package (as they've done here) and the very best in audio quality.

http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/1110/transformers.html

Considering the PR impact and the importance of the media outlet, if they had misquoted Paramount, they would have recanted it promptly. It is still there.

If you can find a DIRECT quote from Paramount, I will eat crow.

Not really important, I just get sick of people reporting this as fact.

Of course, they should have issued a press release titled "Transformers becomes the fastest-selling hidef title*
*in spite of not including lossless sound because of capacity reasons".

William

05-07-08, 10:08 AM

DD+ @1.5 Mbps is a good alternative for DD @640 Kbps...

DD+ is optional on BD so you would have to include a DD track also. Since DD+ is not mandatory it just has no "good fit" in the BD world.

Brian81

05-07-08, 11:50 AM

No no no... You got it all wrong. You see the reason why only 20% of HDDVD releases have lossless audio is because HDDVD studios were "lazy". :rolleyes:

These HDDVD fanatics just can't admit that the technology was dead on arrival and couldn't consistently provide the full HD experience like Blu-ray is capable of. I guess it hurts their pride since they spent good money on that second rate format. At the end of the day, it doesn't matter though because Blu-ray won and the consumer didn't get the shaft by having to settle for "good enough". Full bitrate video and audio for all!! :cool:

What about those instances where the import HD DVD has DTS-HD MA while the domestic Blu-ray has plain-jane DD? Studio choice. I'm sure there are instances where titles may have been limited (to where the bitrate meter could have been higher on BD obviously (whether or not it would have made a noticeable difference), but IMO it's constantly being used as a scapegoat in every instance where there's a problem or if a release is lacking something. Even when it's a BD exclusive (ex. upcoming Warner releases)!

JBlacklow

05-07-08, 12:33 PM

If you can find a DIRECT quote from Paramount, I will eat crow.
http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/1110/transformers.html
http://johncarmichaels.typepad.com/carmichaels_position/WindowsLiveWriter/Eat%20Crow_thumb.jpg

I'm not sure if it goes better with white or red, though.

briankmonkey

05-07-08, 12:37 PM

http://johncarmichaels.typepad.com/carmichaels_position/WindowsLiveWriter/Eat%20Crow_thumb.jpg

I'm not sure if it goes better with white or red, though.

How about Blu :p

tvine2000

05-07-08, 12:47 PM

as long as surround sound has existed in home theater its never lived up to the hype.

metalsaber

05-07-08, 01:51 PM

Wonder if Battlestar Galactica with DTS-Master will sound any better? This is probably one I will rebuy in BD.

Milt99

05-07-08, 03:20 PM

captaincelluloid

05-07-08, 07:35 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by captaincelluloid
Keep in mind that the first gen HD-DVD players could internally convert
DD PLUS and TRUE HD to DTS at 1.5 Mbs. It may sound
counter intuitive to go from lossless THD to lossy DTS -- or with DD+
from lossy to higher bit rate lossy -- but it did produce superior
sound much of the time. NOTE to FILMIXER. Do you concur?

Never heard the re-encodes.. was HDMI from the start ;)

Sorry.

Thought I recalled you discussing them.
I've edited my post to correct my error.

That said.

They did sound better to me . . . more dynamic yet smoother with
more fine detail and ambience. . . . . . but now that I think of it
that seems like a lot of processing and processing power involved.
IE True Hd to, what?, PCM then PCM to lossy DTS?

It did sound better but how much and why.

Any thoughts / reality checks? Is it easier to do something like this with DTS as opposed to Dolby?

-30-

captaincelluloid

05-07-08, 07:37 PM

Wonder if Battlestar Galactica with DTS-Master will sound any better? This is probably one I will rebuy in BD.

+1

. . . . but they had better improve the PICTURE quality as well. It was only a small notch better the the DVD version.
Looked to me like LOTS of HF softening going on. Hopefully with more BR bandwidth they can
re encode it and get the sharpness back . . . and the grain . . . . it is intended to be a noisy/grainy show so Grain Haters take note.

I'm Softness Hater my own self

-30-

Faceless Rebel

05-07-08, 07:38 PM

Battlestar Galactica looks awful on Sci-Fi Channel HD too. There might be something wrong with the way that show was originally filmed.

Faceless Rebel

05-07-08, 07:41 PM

I'm convinced several of you really miss the smackdown format war days.
Where do you get the thrill of the anonymous forum bitch-slap now?
The 15 year old mentality wears a bit thin after 2 years.
In reality, in a blind test none of you could tell the difference between the the Transformers in DD+, TrueHD or the latest dumbass boner-giver, DTS-HD-MA.

There WAS no Smackdown format war days here. You're thinking of High-Def Digest. Here at the AVS Forum it was HD DVD Propaganda 24/7, and I think a lot of the Blu supporters are still bitter about the way even the mods were so blatantly pro-Red until the bitter finale. There's a reason why all the Blu insiders abandoned this forum and set up shop at Blu-ray.com, you know.

captaincelluloid

05-07-08, 07:54 PM

There WAS no Smackdown format war days here. You're thinking of High-Def Digest. Here at the AVS Forum it was HD DVD Propaganda 24/7, and I think a lot of the Blu supporters are still bitter about the way even the mods were so blatantly pro-Red until the bitter finale. There's a reason why all the Blu insiders abandoned this forum and set up shop at Blu-ray.com, you know.

Not sure that I know enough to agree or disagree RE: AVS

I do recall that BR did get alot of heat for being slow out of the gate with quality and features . . .
and I think alot of that was deserved.

What I DO know first hand is that I have MUCH more trouble with
my BR player than I did with my HD-DVD player. . .

and the audio codecs seemed easier to deal with.

Now, I loves me my Blu Ray player . . . when it's working great . .
but about 20 percent of the rental BR discs I get are unplayable and then replacement discs ARE playable so it's not my player.

And I MUST say that it is disturbing that the price of BR players
seems to be going UP not down . . . as they finally offer all the features that HD-DVD had.

Nope.

I'm not a HD-DVD die hard . . . . but the "war" did seem to lower the prices. I just want Blu Ray to get better and cheaper faster.

-30-

bplewis24

05-07-08, 08:14 PM

Not sure that I know enough to agree or disagree RE: AVS

I was here at the start of it (actually before it started, when they were both vaporware) and it was definitely as bad as Rebel suggests.

Brandon

Urza

05-07-08, 08:35 PM

http://johncarmichaels.typepad.com/carmichaels_position/WindowsLiveWriter/Eat%20Crow_thumb.jpg

I'm not sure if it goes better with white or red, though.

Which is why I love lawyer speak.

Again, show me the direct quote FROM Paramount? Not from a guy who attended an event.

Honestly, you think I am not aware of this article? Repeated links to an article that has a guy talking about what he heard at an event is not a DIRECT quote.

Besides, I should not care anyway, HDDVD is dead.

JBlacklow

05-07-08, 08:49 PM

Which is why I love lawyer speak.

Again, show me the direct quote FROM Paramount? Not from a guy who attended an event.
Translation: "I knew I was going to be proven wrong, but now that you guys actually brought the proof, I'm going to stamp my feet, shake my head, and stick my fingers in my ears and go LALALALA YOU'RE WRONG LALALALA."

You want to talk about HD DVD, go to the HD DVD areas and stop threadcrapping/attempting to get the thread derailed.

Urza

05-07-08, 08:54 PM

Urza

05-07-08, 08:57 PM

Translation: "I knew I was going to be proven wrong, but now that you guys actually brought the proof, I'm going to stamp my feet, shake my head, and stick my fingers in my ears and go LALALALA YOU'RE WRONG LALALALA."

You want to talk about HD DVD, go to the HD DVD areas and stop threadcrapping/attempting to get the thread derailed.

Wow a little excited are we not? Poor translation at best.

I dont own an HDDVD, so not much for me to talk about in that section.

jayray

05-07-08, 09:03 PM

If disk space was the reason for Paramount not including Lossless sound, why could other studios include it. Paramount has done this with sound even on SD for years and it had nothing to do with space. When others used DTS, Paramount stuck with DD until they could squeeze us for a Special ED with DTS. Clearly space had nothing to do with it. I don't trust anything Paramount says.

thebland

05-08-08, 06:52 AM

Bland your dead wrong. I have researched this to death.

This all came from an article about a guy who went to some screen test. He said that the Paramount rep told him this. In other words, second hand.

If you can find a DIRECT quote from Paramount, I will eat crow.

Not really important, I just get sick of people reporting this as fact.

As you are aware, I am rarely misinformed / incorrect when speaking anything Home Theater. Even so on this point.

As Grubert pointed out, it was Peter Bracke at a Paramount event with a direct answer from the Paramount as to the need to use DD+ rather than TRUE HD. I knew this was the case but simply could not remember who said it....

Be careful when arguing a point with me.... You may learn something..:D

Hughmc

05-08-08, 07:36 AM

You can say anything you want. HDDVD had more fans here, but Mods blatantly pro red??? gimme a break. As one who chose the HDDVD side during the war, plenty of ACCUSED mods slapped me around, and good.

So the Blu insiders went to a site with a less hostile crowd? well duh!! my impressions of some of the mods was that they did not like to be challenged, tucked tail and ran. Just look at Penton Man now on the site. He has his own thread full of Penton worship, its plain disturbing.

Just because they "slapped" you around a bit doesn't mean the mods weren't pro or favoring red. In fact a mod who I will leave nameless said in no uncertain terms that althought the forum is/was neutral many members and mods favored red because it came out first and therefore by default it got favored.

You find Penton worship disturbing, lol. How about the half dozen or so red zealots that are still holding out, but they too will remain nameless. They don't own BD and openly say they may never own it. I wish the AVS PS forum rule would apply in that if you don't own said item and have no intentioning of owning it, do not post there. Anyway one hold out in fact happens to have or should I say be in virtually every thread that gets closed. He seems to only post infrequently to say something negative about BD and get a slam in against some member for some comment they made. I can see it as it is blatantly obvious with a little member search and personally I would have banned him. I am sure the mods are aware, but he rides the line. Most of us BD owners know who they are. :D

Oh well. So it goes.

I am enjoying DTSMA, but am just as happy if not more so with PCM especially as an owner of two PS3's.

bplewis24

05-08-08, 11:07 AM

Rakesh.S

05-08-08, 11:09 AM

ibtl

BluLover

05-08-08, 11:15 AM

I can't wait to get Transformers in TrueHD and BD50...Sweet! :D

Urza

05-08-08, 11:25 AM

As you are aware, I am rarely misinformed / incorrect when speaking anything Home Theater. Even so on this point.

This one gets a simple LOL.

My last word on the subject.

Again, not sure why I had to point this out to the people jumping on me, I asked for a direct quote, and people keep sending me to an article from a guy during a press event. When you say "I heard from this guy" that is not a direct quote. Im not sure how much more clear I have to be on this. As if I did not know about that article.

Also, the subject of Transformers lossless is in dispute anyway. Check out the HUGE poo fling fest in that thread awhile back, about Josh Z's HDD article talking about lossless, and how people are spec whores, etc. etc. A bunch of people provided some solid evidence that a 5.1 and a TrueHD would have fit fine(The sound mixer guy,etc.) Granted the thread has the usual cadre of forum hooligans from both sides which turned into a RED side says it fits, Blue side says it does not.

I am not technical enough to say I am any kind of expert in codecs, etc. What I am saying is this subject is inconclusive, and I took issue with those that keep passing it off as fact. My stand is "I have doubt" I just dont know.

Of course, this thread has turned out to be the same. BD guys saying it did not fit,former Reds saying it did.

Oh well, on to the subject at hand.

Did you hear Universal is going DTS-HD MA?:D