Format Battle General Discussion Thread: Discuss it here! [Text View] - Page 14

jdg345

01-22-07, 06:22 PM

This just in - Sony cuts the price of the entry level PS3 in Japan... AGAIN.

http://ps3center.net/story-205.html

You'll recall they cut the price in Japan just before launch.

The story says that sales of the PS3 have ground to a complete standstill in its native country and retailers are angry.

If Sony is forced to cut the price in the USA as well, I'd imagine that the losses would be horrific.

I was in a store on Saturday and overheard a customer enquiring about the PS3. The store clerk told him they only had the 60 Gig in stock and refused to sell it to him unless he bought the "bundle" which had some games and an extra controller.

The customer told them where they could put it, and another customer who overheard this also chimed in, in support of the first customer...

Articles like this might just get more people standing on the fence than running out to buying consoles. If people feel a price cut is imminent, they're less likely to run out and buy it (unless they really *need* to have it -- and those people likely already have theirs).

As for the bundles ... I agree with the other posters that those are retailer-defined. Also, bundles are typically forced in periods of high demand / low supply (as they can get you to buy more stuff that way) ... so that kinda makes sense if they only had one or two 60GB units.

Locally, however, most game stores have PS3's if you want them ... both 20GB and 60GB. The general consensus around here is still:

Wii : No. Then they laugh at you for asking. Then they say, 'No' again.
PS2 : Stocks depleted, some stores are still recovering from the Christmas Rush.
Xbox 360 : Pretty much available, some stores still haven't recovered from the Christmas Rush. HD-DVD Add-On can be tough to find locally. I don't know if that's because of demand or just low numbers ordered by retailers though.
PS3 : Pretty much available at one place or another. One Best Buy might be sold out, another Best Buy 10 miles away has 7. Same with Circuit City, Target, etc.

The good news though, is if they get the PS3 dropped down to $300 sooner than later, I'll pick one up for BR playback. My TV supports 1080i/p, so I dont have to deal with the output issues. And I can use my HD-DVD set to upscale SD content. It's a Win-win. ;)

Ezra

01-22-07, 07:06 PM

nataraj

01-22-07, 08:17 PM

Does angrymonkey == brianmonkey?

No. Looks like he is from down under ...

Talkstr8t

01-22-07, 08:38 PM

I've asked several times, as have others ... can you please provide a link to the survey data?No, Sony hasn't publicly published the information to my knowledge.
Unless we know how the survey was conducted, the numbers don't mean anything.I've taken the survey. The wording was almost identical to what has been reported - "Do you plan to watch Blu-ray movies on your PS3", etc.

Talkstr8t

01-22-07, 08:43 PM

[QUOTE=Talkstr8t]Then why no lossless audio on King Kong?[QUOTE]Studios decide what audio to encode each movie with. Lack of disc space was not the factor that made up their decision. The disc was basically full. What would they have dumped for lossless audio? They'd either need to degrade the video quality, drop extras, or leave out lossless. What other options do they have?
Talk, as I recall their no lossless audio on the BD King Kong either or any video either. Only kidding, as we all know you need a HD DVD player to watch King Kong in HD. Congratulations, you've identified the one movie out of last year's top 20 DVD's not published by a Blu-ray studio. Meanwhile 14 of those top 20 aren't published from an HD DVD studio. I'll win this game every time.
Sony can pay any reputable company to do a survey and still get the results they are looking for.I've taken the survey. The wording was not pre-disposed to a given result in any way.
Do you actually believe 75% of PS3 owners plan on using the Play Station as their primary DVD player. Boy will they be surprised when they see the low quality SD DVD image quality.It didn't say "their primary DVD player", it said a primary video player. That doesn't exclude existing players. Further, there have been many reports of people very satisfied with the quality of their PS3 DVD playback through an upconverting television, moreso than from their upconverting DVD player. You overstate likely customer dissatisfaction (and any upcoming firmware update to explicitly support DVD upsampling puts your argument in the grave).

Capek

01-22-07, 08:45 PM

No. Looks like he is from down under ...
Proxy server? ^_^

angrymonkey

01-22-07, 09:16 PM

Sorry to say i am not the person you believe i am Capek.

Move along...

b2bonez

01-22-07, 09:20 PM

Quote of the day....
My personal opinion is that neither side is going to win. We will have a PlayStation/Xbox kind of scenario with Blu-ray and HD DVD co-existing.

b2b

Kosty

01-22-07, 09:39 PM

My personal opinion is that neither side is going to win. We will have a
PlayStation/Xbox kind of scenario with Blu-ray and HD DVD co-existing. That's Amirm from the HDD article?

I think this is more likely than a VHS/Betamax one side dies scenario.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=9543078&&#post9543078

That's why I think we should work to eliminate the fear people have in buying into either format. Both will be around a long time, so your current purchases will never become obsolete.

Everyone who can afford it and cares about home theater and home video should just buy a HD DVD or Blu-ray player and start playing movies on it.

Rob Zuber

01-22-07, 09:50 PM

Yet it was clearer than, and more enjoyable than, any BluRay disk I've seen in the past couple of weeks.Anyone who thinks that all BD and HD-DVD releases should look better than a good HD HBO broadcast simply has no idea what they're talking about. The problem is your own lack of information.

darinp2

01-22-07, 10:06 PM

For those who believe that the Amazon numbers from thedvdwars.com are a reasonable indicator of how things are going, Gary (dialog_gvf) just posted a link to a Japanese version of the same thing. It is here:

http://nolist.jp/bdvshddvd/

Here are some relevant statistics from there from when I just looked:

Average for the top 10:

Blu-ray: 450
HD DVD: 3875

Sales ranking for top title from the format:

Blu-ray: 130
HD DVD: 905

Sales ranking for the 10th ranked title from the format:

Blu-ray: 688
HD DVD: 6738

It is possible that some of those are international orders (just like Europeans could be ordering HD DVDs from Amazon in the US since HD DVDs are region free), but the third ranked title on the Blu-ray side at #268 is "16 Blocks", which is available in the US.

--Darin

nataraj

01-22-07, 11:02 PM

Proxy server? ^_^

Obviously I don't have access to IP address. Just saying from a post of his about Aus retailers.

Sorry to say i am not the person you believe i am Capek.

There have been a lot of reports of shills here ...

It is a good idea to introduce yourself when you first start posting .... alas very few do it in this forum. We are not talking about name ... but geography, profession, equipment you have ...

2Channel

01-22-07, 11:46 PM

2Channel

01-22-07, 11:52 PM

Anyone who thinks that all BD and HD-DVD releases should look better than a good HD HBO broadcast simply has no idea what they're talking about. The problem is your own lack of information.

Why insult the man? After spending a lot of money on the Pioneer BD player shouldn't he expect his Blu-Ray discs not to seem dissapointing compared to what he can watch off of his HD DVR? Maybe he just needs to be more patient. The future is full of promise I hear.

rdjam

01-23-07, 12:32 AM

rdjam: The site that you referenced was more than likely using a kotaku article as its source.

Here is a small portion of their article

I would hope in future that you do some proper research before quoting a small no name website before making such grand statements.

So in short this was not an official sony position, so in essence this would debase the entire point of your post.

Cheers.
I know that this was only your fourth post, so I'll try to go easy, but your telling me off for not being accurate seems a bit of a knee-jerk defense.

The story was from a PS3 website, a site that anyone can agree is going to be as kind and accurate to the PS3 as possible.

Now if the story is wrong, then fine, go after that angle - but I certainly didn't make it up or have any reason to think it is not so. I got this from the HD News thread, where it had been posted earlier in the day.

Here is the article, which VERY clearly states that the price has been cut by Sony:

"Sony has cut the price of the Sony PlayStation 3 in just two months after the launch of the console.

There is a bit of a catch to this story though and that it is only pertaining to the 20GB model and only happening in . The price is being cut by 20% which will knock about $82 off the price of the 20GB model in that country.

This is due to a very low demand for the console in its native country as sales of the next-generation console from Sony have completely come to a standstill. Consoles have been sitting on shelves as gamers have been patiently waiting for a price drop or a big game; basically a reason to shell out the cash and own the powerful next-generation machine.

Retailers have begun getting impatient as well as they are selling used PlayStation 3 consoles at far lower prices than they would normally as the prices are way under the sticker price.

If things continue here in the as it did in could this mean that we could be seeing a price drop in North America as well? Only time will tell but with retailers having more than enough stock of systems sitting on the shelves and impatience setting in as money is lost on the retailers end as well as Sony’s end at some point something is going to have to budge to try and get this next-generation machine into the homes of consumers here as well as Japan."

AnthonyP

01-23-07, 12:36 AM

The disc was basically full. What would they have dumped for lossless audio? They'd either need to degrade the video quality, drop extras, or leave out lossless. What other options do they have?

elves, they know magic, every HD DVD fan boy knows that

rdjam

01-23-07, 12:39 AM

elves, they know magic, every HD DVD fan boy knows that
Taking the "high street" instead of the "high road" again, anthony? ;)

Kosty

01-23-07, 12:58 AM

Anyone who thinks that all BD and HD-DVD releases should look better than a good HD HBO broadcast simply has no idea what they're talking about. The problem is your own lack of information. He didn't say all, he said the one he watched, You have to admit, some Blu-ray titles would fit that description.

It is my experience that most of my HD DVD discs and certainly the newer Blu-ray ones I have seen are clearly superior to most cable or sat HD broadcasts. Most so when blocking type artifacts are see in fast action scenes. Plus the HD formats don't crop the OAR to 16:9 (take that HBO HD TNTHD ;)

He was just expressing disapointment that the Blu-ray title he selected didn't meet those expectations. He didn't say all, that was your fiilter, not his.

What'sHD

01-23-07, 01:04 AM

I've taken the survey. The wording was not pre-disposed to a given result in any way.
Talk, do you have a soft copy of the survey form? I would be interested to see the poll Qs. thanks

Richard Paul

01-23-07, 01:10 AM

..... I could go on ;)You could, but most of the comments you made were never said by the BDA, others were unreasonable requests, and a few were accurate. Kosty, you say that you want to be fair to both HD formats but to do that you actually have to try to be fair to both HD formats. Here is what I see wrong in your claims against the BDA:

Misleading consumers with BD Live demos in B&M stores while no products are shipping with that feature is different than a trade show demo :D and is misleadingDoes every DVD player offer the exact same features? Does the Xbox 360 core system and the Xbox 360 system have the same features? Does the Windows Vista Home Basic and Windows Vista Ultimate have the same features? The answer to all three and many other examples is no and just because they showed off features that not all Blu-ray players are capable of doesn't mean you would have the legal grounds to sue CE companies, which some Blu-ray haters are already thinking of doing.

Saying all Blu-ray discs are 50GB and HD DVD are only 30GB when you are releasing all discs for months at 25 GB is misleadingBlu-ray advertising uses 50 GB discs just as HD DVD advertising uses 30 GB discs both of which are the maximum supported by the two formats. I have never seen any BDA advertisement that promised all Blu-ray discs would be 50 GB and could you actually show me one?

Saying LPCM is superior to a mandatory lossless codec is misleadingWhen did the BDA ever say that?

Saying a 1080p output from your first player is superior to a 1080i output from a competing player when you add another chip to the output chain is misleadingThat is debatable. For instance even some of the HD DVD supporters mocked the Samsung for using a second video chip to get 1080p60 output. Heck, I think even Amir did that.

Not saying consumers that your HD player won't play CD's like every DVD player on the market is misleadingThat is an unreasonable request since that is something not required by the Blu-ray specs, HD DVD specs, or DVD specs. Also if you claim that it was an expected feature than couldn't one also make that same argument for resume on HD DVD movies?

Not saying upconversion capabilities on your cheapest HD player and then showing consumer demos using basic 480i and MPEG-2 at jacked up bit rates is misleadingThe first thing you say is wrong since the PS3 was never guranteed that feature. As for your second claim I don't even know if such a thing ever happened or if that is just a rumor.

Not saying you are wasting space on your 50GB or 25GB discs because you are using space wasting MPEG-2 and LPCM is misleadingThough somewhat exaggerated I agree with that. I also perfectly understand why Sony defended the use of MPEG-2 and LPCM for Blu-ray. It is very similiar in my opinion to HD DVD promoters who argue that 30 GB is enough and that no studio ever asked for triple layer HD DVD to be added to the HD DVD specs. In both cases it was a justfication. The only difference is that in the former case it will change while I personally doubt that the latter case will ever change.

Not telling consumers that there newly bought $1000 players won't use BD Live features and may be obsolete soon or will perform in a lessor manner to next June's players or they will be handicapped is misleadingAn unreasonable request since no manufacturer ever tells the customers what a product lacks. To call it misleading sounds okay for those that dislike Blu-ray profiles but it isn't true. After all none of the Blu-ray players released last year actually promised any of the features in BD-Live. As for the risk of performing in a lesser manner I have noted that many HD-A1 owners ended up buying the HD-A2 or the Xbox 360 add-on. Why do you think they would do that?

Not telling consumers about a need a fix for a "noise reduction' issue on your format's only player or blaming it on blind critics is misleadingI would agree with that. Though there was some truth to it to blame the entire problem on the NR issue was misleading. I think many people though use this excuse to hate Blu-ray and personally speaking I don't think that is very fair.

AnthonyP

01-23-07, 01:12 AM

Taking the "high street" instead of the "high road" again, anthony?

calling it as I see it. What is left when someone posts BS that they could have added lossless and it was not a space limit when anyone with a first grade math course can obviously notice it would not fit. But some guys don’t let facts get in the way

DTV TiVo Dealer

01-23-07, 01:20 AM

AnthonyP, since you seem to know better than I do, tell us quickly how much space was left on the King Kong disc and how much space would it take to add lossless audio?

-Robert

Richard Paul

01-23-07, 01:24 AM

Hi Richard - have already answered the questions in detail, so no point in me going around the houses yet again. Your questions and quotes are the same.If you say so, though I think the real reason is because you would have had a heck of a time defending that statement about DTS-HD lossless decoding (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=9522879&&#post9522879). Also I am still interested in how exactly you "know" that the chips in the HD-A1 were capable of 1080p24 output. Especially since Alex once said that the decoder used in the HD-A1 wasn't capable of 1080p24 output.

Talkstr8t

01-23-07, 02:00 AM

Talk, do you have a soft copy of the survey form? I would be interested to see the poll Qs. thanksNo, the survey was done via the Playstation when registering via the network, so I don't have access to the questions. Perhaps if anyone else reading this hasn't yet registered they can jot them down when they do (if they get the survey, I don't know if it's random or if everyone gets it).

amirm

01-23-07, 02:02 AM

Then why no lossless audio on King Kong?
Simple. Universal believes that 1.5 mbit/sec for movies, provides the same quality as lossless audio. This is backed by what Dolby told them as compared to TrueHD. Creating multiple sound tracks costs more and if someone believes they have all the quality in a single encode, well, there is good logic in that.

The disc was basically full.
Of course it was. We always use the full space and bandwidth of HD DVD. It is not like BD where we worry about yields, so 50 gigabytes are left less full ;). One has be crazy to leave space empty on the disc.

As always, we budget the space for the encode and stop optimization when we get there. If we needed more space, we would have set lower budget and achieved that with more tuning.

I've taken the survey. The wording was not pre-disposed to a given result in any way.
I don’t know about the rest of HD DVD proponent but this statement surely took care of any concerns I had. NOT. :)

But you can really help by giving us full list of questions. This kind of thing would go a long way toward making people feel better about non-independent studies.

And one more thing: how do you know Sony did not perform other studies with less favorable results which never got published? You don’t work for them, right? Shoot, maybe you do! :D

2Channel

01-23-07, 02:05 AM

Catalog Depth 3.0

Changes: In addition to the start filter of 1940, these numbers now include and end filter of 2007. This resulted in most numbers shrinking a little. Studio Canal was changed to HD-DVD only. New line grew because I expanded beyond search from New Line Cinema to just New Line. Two adult content producers were added Vivid (supporting both formats) and Wicked Pictures (HD-DVD only). MGM was expanded to 4240. That's 4100 titles at time of sale to Sony, plus an additional 150 titles since the sale. Comments and suggestions welcome.

BD

Lions Gate 773
Sony Pictures 2219
Fox 5156
Buena Vista (Disney) 2233
MGM 4250
Warner 6405
Paramount 3673
Bandai 153
HBO 1027
New Line 753
CBS Television 2699
Vivid 684

TOTAL 30025

HD-DVD

Warner 6405
Paramount 3673
Universal 4252
Bandai 153
Weinstein 81
HBO 1027
New Line 753
Studio Canal 145
CBS Television 2699
Vivid 684
Wicked Pictures 423

TOTAL 20295

Notes: Columbia is not listed out seperately. This is because titles I find when looking under Columbia show up under Sony or Fox as well (search for Spiderman). Similarly MGM sold the rights to its pre 1986 content which is now owned by Warner. I also didn't account for the fact that you can actually get Lionsgate content from EU resellers in HD-DVD. Since there is no region coding in HD-DVD these discs can be used in North America. As for Adult content, Vivid will release in both formats. The other Adult studios that plan to release in HD are HD-DVD exclusive. These include Digital Playground Inc., Wicked Pictures, Pink Visual, Bang Bros, and ClubJenna Inc. The final item is small Indy studios. I suspect that many of these will find it more affordable to do small low cost production runs in HD-DVD. I believe this is why most of the Adult studios decided to go with HD-DVD exclusively.

Talkstr8t

01-23-07, 02:07 AM

AnthonyP, since you seem to know better than I do, tell us quickly how much space was left on the King Kong disc and how much space would it take to add lossless audio?According to this (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=750870) thread King Kong is 29,482,090,496 bytes. TrueHD at 6Mbps for 188 minutes would require 6,768,000,000 bytes. Even if you drop the DTS track you'd only save 1,692,000,000 bytes. Doesn't fit!

Who said 30GB is enough?

amirm

01-23-07, 02:10 AM

Talkstr8t

01-23-07, 02:12 AM

Two adult content producers were added Vivid (supporting both formats) and Wicked Pictures (HD-DVD only). MGM was expanded to 4240. That's 4100 titles at time of sale to Sony, plus an additional 150 titles since the sale. Comments and suggestions welcome.I suggest leaving out the adult films. Assuming you're trying to gauge relative support for films high-def consumers may have an interest in watching, other than a very small handful of high-profile titles, it seems unlikely that most high-def enthusiasts are likely to seek out individual titles (assuming the adult companies even plan to release catalog titles, which seems unlikely since I would imagine most were shot on SD video, not film).

rdjam

01-23-07, 02:16 AM

If you say so, though I think the real reason is because you would have had a heck of a time defending that statement about DTS-HD lossless decoding (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=9522879&&#post9522879). Also I am still interested in how exactly you "know" that the chips in the HD-A1 were capable of 1080p24 output. Especially since Alex once said that the decoder used in the HD-A1 wasn't capable of 1080p24 output.
Already answered here... both and more... http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=9515415&&#post9515415

Hope the link jogs your memory...

What'sHD

01-23-07, 02:17 AM

rdjam

01-23-07, 02:19 AM

No, the survey was done via the Playstation when registering via the network, so I don't have access to the questions. Perhaps if anyone else reading this hasn't yet registered they can jot them down when they do (if they get the survey, I don't know if it's random or if everyone gets it).
I don't suppose the survey only pops up after they have inserted a Bluray disc, huh? ;) :p

amirm

01-23-07, 02:26 AM

I don't suppose the survey only pops up after they have inserted a Bluray disc, huh? ;) :p
Or only sending it only to company employees belonging to BDA. :D

I mean what are the chances that Talk would be selected at random by Sony? And surely we should throw away his vote, no?

angrymonkey

01-23-07, 05:17 AM

Read my previous post...

150 discs encoded with VC-1 and the fact that a bunch of BD titles are in BD-25 ;).

Amirm, why didn't you answer his question, rather than just provide a statistic?.

Do all of those movies also come with True HD as well?

So can you answer his query on the file size?

I currently like both formats, but i had to post because i thought it strange that you would post such an evasive response.

Cheers.

onanie

01-23-07, 05:19 AM

Or only sending it only to company employees belonging to BDA. :D

I mean what are the chances that Talk would be selected at random by Sony? And surely we should throw away his vote, no?

Surely, as a blu-ray insider, he was either shown the survey or had asked to see the survey himself. I'm not sure if talkstr8t ever said that he voted on the subject.

Kosty

01-23-07, 05:32 AM

Who said 30GB is enough? 150 discs encoded with VC-1 and the fact that a bunch of BD titles are in BD-25 . So we have about 300 high definition discs released so far that are 30GB or below (25GB and 30GB) and a dozen o rso that are over 30GBs (ie 50GB). Its seems that 30 GB is enough for most of those releases...that is unless the 140 or so Blu-ray titles on 25 GB were compromised....hard to have it both ways. In some cases it seems that the 50GB didn't impress a lot of people, so bigger isn't always better, its seems how it is used is a factor.

I personally think that the image quality on those 25GB Blu-ray titles is starting to improve greatly, at least by my small demos and Blu-ray film clips I have seen and from what I read from users and critics. (especially it seems to reviewers if they encoded with VC-1 ;)

Kosty

01-23-07, 05:37 AM

Amirm, why didn't you answer his question, rather than just provide a statistic?.

Do all of those movies also come with True HD as well?

So can you answer his query on the file size?

I currently like both formats, but i had to post because i thought it strange that you would post such an evasive response.

Cheers.

He did in his previous post. Not all those discs have DTHD because it a studio decison that it wsa not required.

Read Gruberts stickty thread if you want the breakdown.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=766588

Simple. Universal believes that 1.5 mbit/sec for movies, provides the same quality as lossless audio. This is backed by what Dolby told them as compared to TrueHD. Creating multiple sound tracks costs more and if someone believes they have all the quality in a single encode, well, there is good logic in that.

Of course it was. We always use the full space and bandwidth of HD DVD. It is not like BD where we worry about yields, so 50 gigabytes are left less full ;). One has be crazy to leave space empty on the disc.

As always, we budget the space for the encode and stop optimization when we get there. If we needed more space, we would have set lower budget and achieved that with more tuning.

I don’t know about the rest of HD DVD proponent but this statement surely took care of any concerns I had. NOT. :)

But you can really help by giving us full list of questions. This kind of thing would go a long way toward making people feel better about non-independent studies.

And one more thing: how do you know Sony did not perform other studies with less favorable results which never got published? You don’t work for them, right? Shoot, maybe you do! :D

PeterTHX

01-23-07, 05:41 AM

Universal believes that 1.5 mbit/sec for movies, provides the same quality as lossless audio. This is backed by what Dolby told them as compared to TrueHD.

So now the excuse is "lossy audio is good enough"? That a title like "End of Days" is more deserving of lossless audio than "King Kong"?

And what about the extras? "Kong" on DVD had an entire 2nd disc of extras. The HD DVD adds IME and that's it. Again: limited capacity is to blame. Don't pretend it isn't when Universal previously had presented every SD DVD extra available on previous HD DVD titles.

Or is it the fact that they knew it was going to be the 360 pack in and they wanted to maximize picture quality and didn't have enough room for the extras and lossless audio? We all know the 360 add on sound is screwed up anyway and putting the extras on a second disc would screw up the HD DVD mantra that "30GB is good enough".

One has be crazy to leave space empty on the disc.

Or like Warner, limited by the HD DVD version on titles like "Superman Returns" (softness, banding, etc).

So, if and when "King Kong" is available on BD50, you can add the same VC-1 encode, add lossless audio *and* still have enough room for all the previous extras from the SD DVD!

What'sHD

01-23-07, 05:44 AM

Kosty

01-23-07, 05:49 AM

from the news thread
PS3 Price Could Remain High Until 2008 (http://www.gwn.com/news/story.php/id/11019/title/PS3_Price_Could_Remain_High_Until_2008.html)

Ooops. Sounds like the PS3 (& Blu-ray) are going south for the winter.

PS3 is 97% of BD sales. Nice mix.( from the GWN article)
A recent interview with Sony reveals the price of the PS3 is unlikely to drop for longer than we thoughtDespite the high cost of development and production, Tretton was adamant that the continued high price of the console would not hurt sales in the long run:

"I think the consumers that get their hands on a PlayStation 3 clearly see the value and not only want to buy one for $599, in some instances they're willing to pay ridiculous prices to buy one on eBay." We saw higher prices on E-bay so the price can't be too high. :rolleyes:

What all of this means is the PS3 could remain at its current price until mid-2008 If $499 or $599 is the lowest prices Blu-ray player on the market (the PS3) for the next year and a half, that is a tremendous advantage to HD DVD not only a first to market leader but as a low cost leader.

What'sHD

01-23-07, 05:51 AM

Or only sending it only to company employees belonging to BDA. :D

I mean what are the chances that Talk would be selected at random by Sony? And surely we should throw away his vote, no?
Please throw away his vote, if it makes you happier. What are the chances that a poll with +ive results for Sony would be greeted with non-cynicism? None, nada, zilch, the big 0.

And one more thing: how do you know Sony did not perform other studies with less favorable results which never got published?
This reminds me of your claims about VC1 encodings under 10Mbps and then silence about what type of video content was used for the encoding. How do we know there weren't a bunch of movies that were busting the 20 Mbps mark and still looking not so "Perfect". Selective communication of results, Amir? :D

How do we know indeed?

As Hume would have said.. :)

PeterTHX

01-23-07, 05:52 AM

low cost leader

VHS is cheaper.
McDonald's hamburgers are cheaper than Ruth's Chris Fillet Mignon.
Guess that means better quality, eh?

What'sHD

01-23-07, 05:54 AM

Maybe a lawyer should look into a false marketing lawsuit for the "LaSoP" logo of HD-dvd?

Lossy audio and perfection.. hah

Kosty

01-23-07, 05:57 AM

VHS is cheaper.
McDonald's hamburgers are cheaper than Ruth's Chris Fillet Mignon.
Guess that means better quality, eh? No but more burgers are sold than filets.

and if the 'burgers' here still buy HD movies, more players = more movies sold = more studio money = more incentive to release content = more studio support = more movies = more players = more movies sold ....

a virtuous circle. When you get a critcal mass of players and content out there things can increase exponentially

PeterTHX

01-23-07, 06:00 AM

No but more burgers are sold than filets.

No, now the burgers are competing with DVD itself.

WiFi-Spy

01-23-07, 06:08 AM

VHS is cheaper.
McDonald's hamburgers are cheaper than Ruth's Chris Fillet Mignon.
Guess that means better quality, eh?

Thats the first time I have seen a food analogy used in this war. :)

dialog_gvf

01-23-07, 06:17 AM

If $499 or $599 is the lowest prices Blu-ray player on the market (the PS3) for the next year and a half, that is a tremendous advantage to HD DVD not only a first to market leader but as a low cost leader.

Assuming the PS/3 remains as the only entry level priced BD player indefinitely. Why are you making that assumption?

Gary

Kosty

01-23-07, 06:47 AM

Assuming the PS/3 remains as the only entry level priced BD player indefinitely. Why are you making that assumption?

Gary Because of comments form BDA insiders and from product announcements at Cedia and CES.

I'll try to find the reference, but several Blu-ray guys including Parsons have stated that it would take two years or longer before they thought stand alone prices would fall below $500.

That is unless they drop the prices of their current low volume boutique high priced Blu-ray players they have on the market now.

All of the CES Blu-ray players shown have life cycles that will take them into mid 2008. It would be a real surprise if any Blu-ray company would price a player out that would compete with its own first generation player within 6 months or more of its initial introduction.

The PS3, the Xbox 360 add on and the HD A2 (maybe the HD A20) are the only next generation DVD players being built in mass market quantities (100,000 or more) all the other HD DVD players and all the Blu-ray players that remain are being built in 10,000s.

The announcement of Onkyo and the Chinese manufacturers, and the Meridian entrance into the HD DVD PRG means that lowered cost and more varied HD DVD players are under development.

The Toshiba CEO has also publicly stated that $399 and $299 prices points were in sight near the end of the year for HD DVD players.

The current street price of the Xbox HD DVD add is around $149 and the HD A2 can be had for $449 or less with 3 HD DVDs. (and a Toshiba HDTV bundle promotion is diving a $200 instant rebate on a HDTV HD DVD bundle next week) so prices not only seem to be lower for HD DVD, they seem to be on their way to dropping much faster than those on the Blu-ray side.

It seemed that the PS3 was meant to be the low priced Blu-ray player and the other CE companies were going to attack the high end market with low volume high margin items.

Its kinda hard to shift to a low volume low margin model. ;) That's what would happen if you tried to place a lower priced version out to compete with the PS3 at this moment.

That puts the pricing strategy for the Blu-ray guys to be much more difficult than pricing on the HD DVD side.

webphilosopher

01-23-07, 07:28 AM

Excellent post, Kosty.

Street prices on the HD-A2 (already at $449) will probably drop to $399 with the introduction of the HD-A20.

That leaves the market for Chinese players in the $299 range or below.

Sony has no wiggle room to lower the price of its PS3.

Blu-ray is not courting inexpensive Chinese manufacturers at this time.

Blu-ray prices will remain about two times HD DVD prices.

Just my opinion about where this is headed.

By the time blu-ray drops to $400 at the bottom, HD DVD will be at $200.

HD DVD players, like HD DVD disks, will prove to be less expensive to manufacture than blu-ray.

Kosty

01-23-07, 07:49 AM

By the time blu-ray drops to $400 at the bottom, HD DVD will be at $200.

IMNSHO, first format to $199 players wins 70% of the eventual market.

Grubert

01-23-07, 07:52 AM

Excellent post, Kosty.

Street prices on the HD-A2 (already at $449) will probably drop to $399 with the introduction of the HD-A20.

The HD-A2 is below $400 on amazon as we speak.

webphilosopher

01-23-07, 07:59 AM

The HD-A2 is below $400 on amazon as we speak.

I don't think that blu-ray can compete with this sort of downward pressure, especially with the rebate for three free HD DVDs. Even at $20 each, that drops the real price another $60. It also produces an immediate attachment of three disks per new player. The studios have got to like that rebate, even if they discount their costs for Toshiba.

Kosty

01-23-07, 08:29 AM

The HD-A2 is below $400 on amazon as we speak. :eek:

Does that mean if they drop the MSRP to $399 this year the Amazon price will drop below $299? That's sooner than what I expected. :)

webphilosopher

01-23-07, 08:30 AM

Incidentally, users give the A2 five stars at Amazon, while the closest blu-ray competitor (the Samsung) gets three stars. The A1 still gets 4.5 stars. Potential buyers do read these reviews.

webphilosopher

01-23-07, 08:32 AM

:eek:

Does that mean if they drop the MSRP to $399 this year the Amazon price will drop below $299? That's sooner than what I expected. :)

Very likely, although the three movie deal may end and make it a wash.

jdg345

01-23-07, 08:52 AM

No, Sony hasn't publicly published the information to my knowledge.
I've taken the survey. The wording was almost identical to what has been reported - "Do you plan to watch Blu-ray movies on your PS3", etc.

That's it? That's the whole survey? The question that comes up during the initial configuration of the PS3? That's what this is all based on? :confused:

A question like that, especially during setup, is going to have skewed results. For instance, every PS3 came bundled with a movie -- the average consumer will see it in the box, and answer yes to that question. Especially if it is asked during setup since it alludes to a feature set being activated. If I had a question like that pop up, I'd answer yes too ... just to make sure I had every feature set available.

What is disconcerting to me, then, is that the % wasn't higher ...

scaesare

01-23-07, 08:54 AM

Anyone who thinks that all BD and HD-DVD releases should look better than a good HD HBO broadcast simply has no idea what they're talking about. The problem is your own lack of information.

Good thing that's not the claim BasementBob made then.

In general, the 19.2Mbps cap for ATSC (and many providers don't use all of that) and mandated MPEG2 usage means that ON THE AVERAGE both HD disc formats are capable of a significantly better picture.

Will there be outliers in that equation? Yes. Will your your display and environment impact the extent to which you can appreciate the improvement? Yes again.

But there is no doubt that the general experience after "several discs" should be superior to broadcast ATSC. The problem may be your own lack of personal experience or discrimination. May I ask what you use to evaluate broadcast ATSC vs. the disc formats?

jdg345

01-23-07, 08:56 AM

Why insult the man? After spending a lot of money on the Pioneer BD player shouldn't he expect his Blu-Ray discs not to seem dissapointing compared to what he can watch off of his HD DVR? Maybe he just needs to be more patient. The future is full of promise I hear.

The word is, "potential" ... :p

scaesare

01-23-07, 09:04 AM

Misleading consumers with BD Live demos in B&M stores while no products are shipping with that feature is different than a trade show demo and is misleading.

Does every DVD player offer the exact same features? Does the Xbox 360 core system and the Xbox 360 system have the same features? Does the Windows Vista Home Basic and Windows Vista Ultimate have the same features? The answer to all three and many other examples is no and just because they showed off features that not all Blu-ray players are capable of doesn't mean you would have the legal grounds to sue CE companies, which some Blu-ray haters are already thinking of doing.

Notice Kosty said "no products". That's the problem with the BDA advertising collateral, and hence your argument. They are simply advertising something that "DOES NOT EXIST". This is what is mileading.

Not telling consumers that there newly bought $1000 players won't use BD Live features and may be obsolete soon or will perform in a lessor manner to next June's players or they will be handicapped is misleading
An unreasonable request since no manufacturer ever tells the customers what a product lacks. To call it misleading sounds okay for those that dislike Blu-ray profiles but it isn't true. After all none of the Blu-ray players released last year actually promised any of the features in BD-Live. As for the risk of performing in a lesser manner I have noted that many HD-A1 owners ended up buying the HD-A2 or the Xbox 360 add-on. Why do you think they would do that?

It baffles me that you can say both things in the same response and not realize the problem.

The BDA isn't just "not telling what a product lacks", it IS telling them what the product does. Except it doesn't.

scaesare

01-23-07, 09:24 AM

According to this (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=750870) thread King Kong is 29,482,090,496 bytes. TrueHD at 6Mbps for 188 minutes would require 6,768,000,000 bytes. Even if you drop the DTS track you'd only save 1,692,000,000 bytes. Doesn't fit!

Who said 30GB is enough?

I don't think anybody has said that without qualifications. Both "for most movies" and "for a great A/V experience" have been the general sentiments.

After all, if you simply leave it open ended, then even 50Gb isn't "enough" for some applications.

I'll tell you what: personally owning KK, your math actually proves to me that I can enjoy a stellar presentation for even the small percentage of movies with a run time of greater than 3 hours, and include IME. Which, quite frankly, is good news for both formats in that I see greater interest is using advanced codecs for both, which means for the VAST majority of movies that are in the 2-hour runtime neighborhood, even 25GB is likely sufficient for a great picture, stellar sound, and IME.

And, strangely enough, when you look at these numbers for this vast majority of films with a 2-hour runtime, it may be EXACTLY this issue of including lossless sound that would require a 50GB disc for BR, whereas that additional 5GB on a 30GB HD DVD will likely accomodate it.

scaesare

01-23-07, 09:44 AM

So now the excuse is "lossy audio is good enough"? That a title like "End of Days" is more deserving of lossless audio than "King Kong"?

And what about the extras? "Kong" on DVD had an entire 2nd disc of extras. The HD DVD adds IME and that's it. Again: limited capacity is to blame. Don't pretend it isn't when Universal previously had presented every SD DVD extra available on previous HD DVD titles.

Or is it the fact that they knew it was going to be the 360 pack in and they wanted to maximize picture quality and didn't have enough room for the extras and lossless audio? We all know the 360 add on sound is screwed up anyway and putting the extras on a second disc would screw up the HD DVD mantra that "30GB is good enough".

Or like Warner, limited by the HD DVD version on titles like "Superman Returns" (softness, banding, etc).

So, if and when "King Kong" is available on BD50, you can add the same VC-1 encode, add lossless audio *and* still have enough room for all the previous extras from the SD DVD!

No doubt you can put more on 50 than 30. After all, math is math.

I think the point is what is the cutoff? A 2 hour movie? Two-and-a-half? Three? A six hour miniseries? Ninety percent of catalog titles? Ninety-eight percent?

You can't just pull a number out of a vaccuum, and say "this is good enough" without some context.

So, if you want to build your case around a 3+ hour movie, OK. That may be your personal criteria. But Talk's numbers indicate that dropping DTS and adding TrueHD might have pushed a 188 minute movie with IME to ~34Gb. That means that a 2-hour movie would be ~23Gb. And a 2-1/2 hour feature might be 28-29.

For me, covering 95+% of titles with one disc, and making the rest 2-disc is OK with me.

(Oh, and go ahead and crucify me: but perceptually lossless audio to me is every bit as stunning as the perceptually lossless video we have as well. Honestly, the TrueHD on Batman Begins is spectacular, but KK was no less so.)

dialog_gvf

01-23-07, 09:51 AM

The announcement of Onkyo and the Chinese manufacturers, and the Meridian entrance into the HD DVD PRG means that lowered cost and more varied HD DVD players are under development.

Onkyo and Meridian won't help price. What do they have to do with BD player prices?

The Toshiba CEO has also publicly stated that $399 and $299 prices points were in sight near the end of the year for HD DVD players.

I believe he said their next targets are $399 and $299. Wishful thinking has that scheduled in for the end of the year.

Wishful thinking had it scheduled in by some infamous ex-members for last fall.

What do this have to do with BD player prices?

That puts the pricing strategy for the Blu-ray guys to be much more difficult than pricing on the HD DVD side.

I asked why you think the PS/3 (starting at $499) will remain as the only entry level BD players?

This is not answered by a bunch of statements about HD DVD strategy and pricing.

Gary

WayneL

01-23-07, 11:28 AM

dialog_gvf

01-23-07, 11:44 AM

I don't think Sony will let the PS3 be undersold by BD players if they can help it, and they can't afford to drop the price. They need volume to dig themselves out of a big hole. OTOH other sources of BD lasers may wreck that approach.

Ultimately Sony needs volume sales of GAMES to dig themselves out of the subsidy hole. Games are their main revenue stream. The hardware is the loss leader for the game selling business.

They also make good money off their movie titles. And a bit off every BD title. But, I doubt the latter is significant enough to make up for the hardware loss leader.

I guess they also will make some decent revenue off their disc authoring, production mastering and replication services.

Gary

b2bonez

01-23-07, 11:58 AM

amirm
Universal believes that 1.5 mbit/sec for movies, provides the same quality as lossless audio. This is backed by what Dolby told them as compared to TrueHD.

So now the excuse is "lossy audio is good enough"? That a title like "End of Days" is more deserving of lossless audio than "King Kong"?

And what about the extras? "Kong" on DVD had an entire 2nd disc of extras. The HD DVD adds IME and that's it. Again: limited capacity is to blame. Don't pretend it isn't when Universal previously had presented every SD DVD extra available on previous HD DVD titles.

Or is it the fact that they knew it was going to be the 360 pack in and they wanted to maximize picture quality and didn't have enough room for the extras and lossless audio? We all know the 360 add on sound is screwed up anyway and putting the extras on a second disc would screw up the HD DVD mantra that "30GB is good enough".

Or like Warner, limited by the HD DVD version on titles like "Superman Returns" (softness, banding, etc).

So, if and when "King Kong" is available on BD50, you can add the same VC-1 encode, add lossless audio *and* still have enough room for all the previous extras from the SD DVD!

You know, I would have respect for HD-DVD and their promoters if they just came out and said..

"We screwed up. 30mbps and 30GB discs just aren't adequate for the needs of longer titles and the lossless audio that we mandated for players and we are developing a new disc to meet those needs. It will require early adopters to buy new players to support the new discs, but for the long term a larger and faster disc will be required for future needs. Previous owners will be given a credit for trade-in on their early model players."

But nooo.... All we get is the same old spiel that "smaller and slower" is better than "faster and bigger" even at the very moment a 51GB HD-DVD disc design has been floated out for public comment.

You guys are shameless. And worse, you think people are stupid enough to buy the spin... :rolleyes:

b2b

Kosty

01-23-07, 12:03 PM

I asked why you think the PS/3 (starting at $499) will remain as the only entry level BD players?Because of comments form BDA insiders and from product announcements at Cedia and CES.
I'll try to find the reference, but several Blu-ray guys including Parsons have stated that it would take two years or longer before they thought stand alone prices would fall below $500.

That is unless they drop the prices of their current low volume boutique high priced Blu-ray players they have on the market now.

All of the CES Blu-ray players shown have life cycles that will take them into mid 2008. It would be a real surprise if any Blu-ray company would price a player out that would compete with its own first generation player within 6 months or more of its initial introduction. I don't understand what you don't understand?

Blu-ray spokesmen have stated in interviews that standalone player prices would take 2-3 years to get to the under $500 price point.

No new products were shown at CES, current products shown there for Blu-ray all had MSRP of $799 or more and probably won't be below that in price this year. That leaves the PS3 as the lowest price Blu-ray player on the market this year.

Sony has blu-laser diodes all going to PS3 and Sony Blu-ray players. Microsoft and Toshiba have Nirchia selling large quantities of that other source blue laser diodes to them at the largest quantities and best price. Other CE vendors are looking for mass quantaties of the blue diodes.

HD DVD at least announced the Chinese and Onkyo HD DVD player development plans, that means they will have a chance of hitting the street this year.

I believe he said their next targets are $399 and $299. Wishful thinking has that scheduled in for the end of the year.The HD-A2 is below $400 on amazon as we speak.
Does that mean if they drop the MSRP to $399 this year the Amazon price will drop below $299? That's sooner than what I expected. ;) :D

Kosty

01-23-07, 12:10 PM

Ultimately Sony needs volume sales of GAMES to dig themselves out of the subsidy hole. Games are their main revenue stream. The hardware is the loss leader for the game selling business.

They also make good money off their movie titles. And a bit off every BD title. But, I doubt the latter is significant enough to make up for the hardware loss leader.

I guess they also will make some decent revenue off their disc authoring, production mastering and replication services.

Gary Agree with you here. The early and continuing Xbox 360 lead in this current game console generation sales is a big hit to Sony and may affect the PS3 sales levels, PS3 game title sales and Blu-ray movie disc sales.

dialog_gvf

01-23-07, 12:18 PM

Because of comments form BDA insiders and from product announcements at Cedia and CES.

You realise we have a BD hardware insider on these forums, right? Have you been reading what he is saying?

Microsoft announced hardware plans WAAAAY too early for sensible marketing. It was driven by having to have something to announce.

Normally a CE product will be announced a maximum of 2-3 months before it intended to go to market to insure it doesn't harm sales of current models. I expect at the point of announcement the last production run of the current model is complete.

So, if there are any cheaper BD models coming for Q4, you won't see them announced until early Q3 (July) at the earliest. Don't assume that standard business practices means nothing is coming.

Gary

Kosty

01-23-07, 12:25 PM

Even if that happened that is still 9 months of the HD A2 on the market $300 -$400 cheaper than any other Blu-ray player (except the PS3).

That's a heck of a long earlier time to market advantage.

If the Blu-ray players hit at that time, HD DVD players will still be cheaper.

I do wish that Blu-ray would have cheaper players out by then, as that would increase overall HD penetration. but I don't think its gonna happen.

dialog_gvf

01-23-07, 12:53 PM

Even if that happened that is still 9 months of the HD A2 on the market $300 -$400 cheaper than any other Blu-ray player (except the PS3).

That's a heck of a long earlier time to market advantage.

We should be seeing a lot more excitement about purchasing HD DVD players on here, and a lot less concern about the lack of HD DVD title announcements.

At some point in the next few months the title comparisons on the shelves are going to become rather startling. And no $300 saving is going to get that comparison out of the head of the consumer.

There is a lot more margin with the Sammy $799 product, so you could see greater % discounts than the A2. And the PS/3 is still a majorly attractive choice, and a darn good player.

Are common adopters going to put up with the issues people experience on the A2?

Gary

WayneL

01-23-07, 01:36 PM

All we get is the same old spiel that "smaller and slower" is better than "faster and bigger" even at the very moment a 51GB HD-DVD disc design has been floated out for public comment. b2b
I contend that 51 GB is being offered for those who won't give up MPEG2

You guys are shameless. And worse, you think people are stupid enough to buy the spin... :rolleyes:

dialog_gvf

01-23-07, 01:43 PM

I contend that 51 GB is being offered for those who won't give up MPEG2

Oddly, Paramount is the only big five that hasn't announced or released a non-MPEG-2 title for BD.

Warner: VC-1
Disney: MPEG-2 and VC-1
Fox: MPEG-2 and AVC
Sony: MPEG-2 and Open Season and Casino Royale announced as AVC

Gary

darinp2

01-23-07, 01:45 PM

I contend that 51 GB is being offered for those who won't give up MPEG2Please tell us who you think it is being added for (if it is really being added). And if it spins at 1.5x minimum instead of 1.0x minimum with more bandwidth allocation, why do you think they would do that when it would require a higher standard for building players than a 1.0x spin rate? Sorry, but if you believe that 1.5x is just for MPEG2, I believe you have been suckered by some spin.

--Darin

WayneL

01-23-07, 01:53 PM

Did I miss anyone announcing that BD is giving up MPEG2? Did I hear anyone say that HD forum has decided that their conclusion that HD-30 is fully adequate was wrong? Or, did I hear BD proponents say that 30 GB isn't enough for them? I suspect that HD is considering this to quell the criticism. They may decide it isn't worth it.

darinp2

01-23-07, 02:11 PM

orogogus

01-23-07, 02:32 PM

Please tell us who you think it is being added for (if it is really being added). And if it spins at 1.5x minimum instead of 1.0x minimum with more bandwidth allocation, why do you think they would do that when it would require a higher standard for building players than a 1.0x spin rate? Sorry, but if you believe that 1.5x is just for MPEG2, I believe you have been suckered by some spin.

--Darin

I think that it's a specmanship move to address perceived inadequacy and to entice Disney and/or other BD studios to go neutral or switch. Much like BD+ was added to the BD spec to placate Fox (IIRC even paidgeek has stated Sony has no intention of using BD+ on their movies).

You could argue that the higher specs might facillitate getting a little bit more out of difficult masters, putting in more features on one disk (for whatever reason), and/or allowing compressionists more flexibility with their work-flow. Obviously BD has on paper a bigger bit bucket and larger bandwidth to utilize the bucket, but in reality it's hard to argue how much quality, if any, has been left on the table by HD DVD's limitations (relative to BD). Especially without access to the masters.

Personally, I think it's a good thing to see HD DVD improve to fill its gaps relative to BD while still retaining what I consider to be the format's strengths; namely- cost, backwards compatiblity, an apparently more flexible and easier to implement interactive layer, and superior mandatory features (eg TrueHD).

I find it odd that stones are being thrown at HD DVD when they are the format that has consistently under promised and over delivered. BD is chasing HD DVD despite a gap in specs and not the other way around. HD DVD51 would eliminate in my mind all advantages of BD ROM, at the expense of potentially alienating some early adopters (a tactic that the BDA clearly has no issues with- or at least one that Talk doesn't...). It would enable you to chase those outlier movie cases that you are so keen on drumming up Darin, so I guess it's a win-win all around, no?

b2bonez

01-23-07, 02:44 PM

I stand by the assumption that HD DVD discs are cheaper to replicate as a rule. DL30s and 30/9 Combos aer probably within pennies of DVD9s. All that changes there is the mastering of the data layer which has smaller pit/,ands adn a tighter pitch. Thats commodity level technology.

TL 45/51 's are more difficult, but still based on proven technology, The problem is probably not reliable consistent replication but legacy player support.

Total HD discs are going to be cheap on the HD DVD side and expensive on the Blu-ray side. Those will be the most expensive discs probably of either format.

Blu-ray DL50 and SL25 are probably past their teething problems, but their limited number of tightly controlled mastering facilities and replication lines make them more expensive. Plus their replication is still not at the maturity of DVD replication in reject rates etc. Thus they cost more. Just because BD50's are showing up doesn't mean they can be produced in DVD level mass quantities yet.

All the assumptions of HD-DVD being cheap are a myth... Please stop spreading fantasy as fact...
The footprint of a HD-15/DVD-9 line is
about 600 ft2, requiring 1.5 operators to produce about
8,000-12,000 discs per day at a cost of two times that
of the DVD-9 line. HD-30/DVD-9 is larger still – 820 ft2,
with two operators per line, producing 5,000-discs per day
at a cost 2.5 times that of DVD.

b2b

WayneL

01-23-07, 02:47 PM

So, who do you think it was announced for? Fox? Sony? Somebody else?--Darin
The only substantial reason I can think of is to allow BD-50 titles (that actually require more than 30 GB and most likely in MPEG2) to be republished in HD format without re-encoding more efficiently. Long term demand may be too low to make it practical as more studios/titles opt for AVC and AVS-1.

dialog_gvf

01-23-07, 02:54 PM

The footprint of a HD-15/DVD-9 line is
about 600 ft2, requiring 1.5 operators to produce about
8,000-12,000 discs per day at a cost of two times that
of the DVD-9 line. HD-30/DVD-9 is larger still – 820 ft2,
with two operators per line, producing 5,000-discs per day
at a cost 2.5 times that of DVD.

Utterly amazing. And the studios are supposed to be favouring the combo form, right?

Gary

johnu

01-23-07, 02:55 PM

I asked why you think the PS/3 (starting at $499) will remain as the only entry level BD players?

This is not answered by a bunch of statements about HD DVD strategy and pricing.
Gary

And it's certainly not answered by a non-existent press release from a BD company announcing an entry level player. The only thing I could find was this comment from a Sony official,

"If you go back to when DVDs came into play, it took about three years until they got into price points of $299 to $399. I suspect it's about the same thing here with Blu-ray. I think it's going to take up to three years to get down to those price points, possibly a little longer. But I would assume it's similar to DVD. "

But maybe you were thinking about a $700-800 entry level player, so nevermind.

darinp2

01-23-07, 03:03 PM

It would enable you to chase those outlier movie cases that you are so keen on drumming up Darin, so I guess it's a win-win all around, no?I would love to see HD DVD do this. Especially with the 1.5x spin rate. But I don't believe it isn't for advanced codec work also.
The only substantial reason I can think of is to allow BD-50 titles (that actually require more than 30 GB and most likely in MPEG2) to be republished in HD format without re-encoding more efficiently. Long term demand may be too low to make it practical as more studios/titles opt for AVC and AVS-1.Disney has already used VC-1 with Flightplan and that encode wouldn't work on HD DVD without reencoding (the max bitrate is way too high) with a 1.0x spin rate. My understanding is that multiple titles from Disney that were released today will be on BD50s. We'll get to see what codec they use, but from Flightplan it looks like they are moving beyond MPEG2. You seem to be under the impression that just using AVC or VC-1 takes away bandwidth and space issues. I'm betting Disney doesn't want to be in a position where they have to leave lossless audio off (and then tell people it was because the lossy stuff sounds just as good) and while the advanced video codecs can help, they obviously don't solve issues like those. If you think they do, then why doesn't HD DVD have any 24/48 lossless movie releases in the US (at least last time I checked). The stuff that is being sold as "lossless" on HD DVD is mostly 16/48, which is what I call "lossy lossless" from 24/48 masters since they get rid of part of it and then use lossless from that point. And even then HD DVD doesn't have a very high percentage with lossless or uncompressed. It is true that Blu-ray has quite a few 16/48 uncompressed tracks at the moment with just some 24/48 tracks, but at least they are doing some and I expect to see more in the future.

Do you think that Amir would have gone from telling us how much he pushed lossless audio for the HD DVD format (which he did in the past) to now telling us that the reason it was left off "King Kong" is because lossy is just as good, if it weren't for bandwidth (or space) issues with their 1.0x spin rate (and 30GB discs)?

--Darin

Kosty

01-23-07, 03:06 PM

All the assumptions of HD-DVD being cheap are a myth... Please stop spreading fantasy as fact...

b2b 2 x a very smaller number or even 2.5 x a very small number can still be a small number

You need the DVD cost to put it in perspective.

if the DVD9 is $.6 a disc in lots of 50,000 then thats

2 x .60 = 1.20 (corrected)
2.5 x .60 = 1.50 (corrected)

$1.20 a disc or $1.50 a disc is probably still far less than a Blu-ray disc

http://www.mediatechnics.com/phpquote/dvdreplication.php

online quote for 50,000 DVD9's
http://www.mediatechnics.com/phpquote/dvdreplicationconfirm.php

Give me comparisons to Blu-ray's disc costs compared to a DVD's, and we'll talk.

Don't forget to include the authoring and setup cost, and maybe the cost of the new replication lines.

WayneL

01-23-07, 03:14 PM

All the assumptions of HD-DVD being cheap are a myth... Please stop spreading fantasy as fact...b2b
Nothing like a selective quote. How about this, which he doesn't want you to read since he doesn't give a source:

“If we compare some of the key manufacturing
attributes for DVD-9 for example, a replication
system takes up about 320 ft2 and it uses about half
an operator per line to provide an output of between
25,000 and 30,000 discs per day. HD-30 uses a
slightly bigger footprint because it needs a little bit
more space for inspection equipment, and it needs
slightly more operator time than DVD-9. For this, the
output is between 15,000 and 20,000 per day and
the cost of the equipment, compared with a DVD-9
line, is a factor of 1.2.”

Read it all: http://www.oto-online.com/pdf/oto_download/2006/10/OTO_October_P55-58_EMX.pdf

BTW b2b blocks me, so you can quote this back for his benefit

P.S. not to mention this is old news

WayneL

01-23-07, 03:33 PM

Darin, these are business choices. If Disney is convinced there will never be an HD market for them, or they don't mind re-authoring in the future, or they believe there will be an HD+ format that's their business. They can put out a decent product that will fit 30 GB. I have some difficulty believing BD will win on bloated features or audio. My criteria has always been cost and video performance. Audio is way too subjective, and most people don't watch features IMO.

b2bonez

01-23-07, 03:34 PM

2 x a very smaller number or even 2.5 x a very small number can still be a small number You need the DVD cost to put it in perspective.

....probably far less than Blu-ray far larger cost per workable disc.

Give me comparisons to Blu-ray's disc costs compared to a DVD's, and we'll talk.

Don't forget to include the authoring and setup cost, and maybe the cost of the new replication lines.

Well see, that's the point. There is no published data on the costs of BD replication, only the rumors spread by the HD-DVD promoters like yourself. You claim first that 50GB is science fiction -- they are in the stores now. You claim they are too expensive --- they are in the stores now. You claim the yields are terrible --- they are in the stores now.

The only people who could possibly have a problem with BD discs are the studios and they have spoken --- the discs are in the stores now...

So come clean, tell us the truth... about a lot of things... :)

b2b

scaesare

01-23-07, 03:37 PM

All the assumptions of HD-DVD being cheap are a myth... Please stop spreading fantasy as fact...

b2b

So if a DVD9 cost a dime, and a HD30 a quarter, is a 15-cent difference OK with you to call "pennies"?

What if it's 65 cents?

A quick google shows small bactch replicators with DVDprices of $0.35/disc (dunno size). A large scale operation could easily be much lower.

What's your cut-off for "cheap"?

Kosty

01-23-07, 03:39 PM

If you are only pressing BD 50's in a lots of 50,000 or less, you can make those up even with terrible yields and Sony eating the cost.

Replication and costs are obviously still issues or all releases would be BD50, not BD25.

WayneL

01-23-07, 03:40 PM

Wonder why Sony et al don't publish the cost of BD relative to DVD? I'm sure they know. If it was good they'd let us know PDQ.

darinp2

01-23-07, 03:40 PM

scaesare

01-23-07, 03:41 PM

Nothing like a selective quote. How about this, which he doesn't want you to read since he doesn't give a source:

“If we compare some of the key manufacturing
attributes for DVD-9 for example, a replication
system takes up about 320 ft2 and it uses about half
an operator per line to provide an output of between
25,000 and 30,000 discs per day. HD-30 uses a
slightly bigger footprint because it needs a little bit
more space for inspection equipment, and it needs
slightly more operator time than DVD-9. For this, the
output is between 15,000 and 20,000 per day and
the cost of the equipment, compared with a DVD-9
line, is a factor of 1.2.”

Read it all: http://www.oto-online.com/pdf/oto_download/2006/10/OTO_October_P55-58_EMX.pdf

BTW b2b blocks me, so you can quote this back for his benefit

P.S. not to mention this is old news

I suspect he does me as well... so here's his second chance to not see it!

b2bonez

01-23-07, 03:42 PM

2 x a very smaller number or even 2.5 x a very small number can still be a small number

You need the DVD cost to put it in perspective.

if the DVD9 is $.06 a disc in lots of 50,000 then thats

2 x .06 = .12
2.5 x ,06 = .15

12 cents a disc or 15 cents a disc is probably still far less than a Blu-ray disc

http://www.mediatechnics.com/phpquote/dvdreplication.php

online quote for 50,000 DVD9's
http://www.mediatechnics.com/phpquote/dvdreplicationconfirm.php

Give me comparisons to Blu-ray's disc costs compared to a DVD's, and we'll talk.

Don't forget to include the authoring and setup cost, and maybe the cost of the new replication lines.

So are these guys a bunch rip-off artists gouging the public on HD-DVD replication... ??
HD DVD Replication
Single Layer 15GB Dual Layer 30GB

5,000 Discs $1.69 ea $1.99 ea
10,000 Discs $1.55 ea $1.85 ea
25,000 Discs $1.45 ea $1.69 ea
100,000 Discs $1.35 ea $1.55 ea
http://www.proactionmedia.com/hd_dvd_replication.htm

b2b

Kosty

01-23-07, 03:52 PM

b2bonez

01-23-07, 04:06 PM

Wheres the Blu-ray quote including setup, authoring, mastering and other special fees? that don't apply to HD DVD or DVD production? I corrected my post above (missed the decimal place.) but principal still applies.

A studio run at their dedicated batch replication facility is far cheaper than these type of quotes.

In the real world of average consumers all of this doesn't even make a difference, unless you are a HD-DVD supporter and get stuck buying a combo disc @ $5 dollars more that a regular disc.

Maybe that's how Warner does it... All the money they save on HD-DVD replication goes to subsidize all those expensive BD discs... Thank you for your support of Blu-Ray.. :)

b2b

rdjam

01-23-07, 04:24 PM

All the assumptions of HD-DVD being cheap are a myth... Please stop spreading fantasy as fact...

b2b
They are cheaper to make and that's fact. All the gobbledy gook in the world doesn't affect that in the least. Currently existing DVD lines are converted to HD DVD production cheaply and easily, whereas Bluray lines require massive capital investment.

From has been posted up here by insiders, the only way that Bluray quotes are ables to match some HD DVD quotes is because Sony apparently subsidises it. Furthermore, the setup/mastering costs for Bluray are multiples higher than the equivalent HD DVD costs.

But your claims are cute nonetheless ;)

rdjam

01-23-07, 04:27 PM

dialog_gvf

01-23-07, 04:28 PM

Nothing like a selective quote. How about this, which he doesn't want you to read since he doesn't give a source:

“If we compare some of the key manufacturing
attributes for DVD-9 for example, a replication
system takes up about 320 ft2 and it uses about half
an operator per line to provide an output of between
25,000 and 30,000 discs per day. HD-30 uses a
slightly bigger footprint because it needs a little bit
more space for inspection equipment, and it needs
slightly more operator time than DVD-9. For this, the
output is between 15,000 and 20,000 per day and
the cost of the equipment, compared with a DVD-9
line, is a factor of 1.2.”

But, the quote I keep reading is "If we had the capacity, all the discs would be combos".

So, all the above quote does is point the irrelevancy of the replication costs. The studios are willing to spend 2.5x DVD when they only need to spend 1.2x. If replication costs were king, combos wouldn't be made.

And how much is Total HD going to cost?: BD + 1.2 + G (gluing)

That's the cost Warner has decided it wants to pay for every HD DVD disc.

Gary

WayneL

01-23-07, 04:36 PM

So, I take it you won't tell us who you were referring to when you said:
--Darin
I should have said that with a smiley, as earlier when I said it's an escape hatch for when BD fails. :)

I almost bought the HD format at Xmas but stopped because I don't think my RP CRT would show either format much better than my Oppo. Waiting a year to see what's coming in new displays. However, I do not plan to upgrade to audiophile equiment, and I've watched maybe 20 extra features from my ~450 dvd collection, so I don't see mutiple lossless, or features as compelling as price and video quality. So if BD beats HD on price and PQ, it will rise to the top of my list. Meanwhile it's hype as far as Im concerned, because the "superior" format hasn't shown it's superior in either.

b2bonez

01-23-07, 04:42 PM

Parsons and Sheppard said that the lower price point for HD DVD players isn't a hindrance for Blu-ray adoption, and questioned whether Toshiba has a feasible business model when players are sold at a loss.

"It's cheap, but maybe it's cheap for a reason," said Parsons. "If someone wants to spend $499 on a player, they should get a PS3."

http://www.cepro.com/news/editorial/17508.html

b2b

BenDover

01-23-07, 04:52 PM

But, the quote I keep reading is "If we had the capacity, all the discs would be combos".

So, all the above quote does is point the irrelevancy of the replication costs. The studios are willing to spend 2.5x DVD when they only need to spend 1.2x. If replication costs were king, combos wouldn't be made.

And how much is Total HD going to cost?: BD + 1.2 + G (gluing)

That's the cost Warner has decided it wants to pay for every HD DVD disc.

Gary

how many combos have been released to date?

WayneL

01-23-07, 04:56 PM

So, all the above quote does is point the irrelevancy of the replication costs. Gary
I think you are right. Even if a DVD9 costs $0.50 to produce in quantity, a combo will only cost $1.25 in quantity. This would become attractive if the dual inventory costs are reduced by $0.75 per disk over both formats. Seeing the HD runs are going to be small for a long time, with much higher costs, this could be so, now.

I doubt the studios pay anywhere near online replication prices

The $5 premium might be discarded for new titles if this is so.

WayneL

01-23-07, 05:01 PM

Parsons and Sheppard said that the lower price point for HD DVD players isn't a hindrance for Blu-ray adoption, and questioned whether Toshiba has a feasible business model when players are sold at a loss.

"It's cheap, but maybe it's cheap for a reason," said Parsons. "If someone wants to spend $499 on a player, they should get a PS3."

Real class act there Parsons. BD is known by its friends

nataraj

01-23-07, 05:40 PM

"It's cheap, but maybe it's cheap for a reason," said Parsons. "If someone wants to spend $499 on a player, they should get a PS3."

I wonder why - if Apple were really an active BDA member and the BD drive is as inexpensive as the HD DVD drive - AppleTV doesn't have a Blu-ray model for $499 - instead of just a media extender for $299 ...

UxiSXRD

01-23-07, 06:05 PM

Probably because Apple can make nearly that much for an iPod with much cheaper components. Apple's pricing (and thus likely the margins) have always been high on their hardware.

I do expect to see BD Super Drives on the Mac Pro pretty soon, though.

Rob Zuber

01-23-07, 06:21 PM

dialog_gvf

01-23-07, 07:11 PM

Good to see the DVD Empire's sales percentages for the week. BD has hit 60%.

HD-DVD: 39.01%
Blu-Ray: 60.99%

Seems that is a rolling number, and it updates daily. That's a 2% increase so in one day!

Gary

Urian

01-23-07, 07:42 PM

I have to say that if something puts me outside the BluRay for now (and I have to say that is my favourite HD optical format) is the lack of something like a BD-Drive that only reads with a PCI card with a Sigma Chip decoding for low end PCs or the BD-Drive only.

This BD-Drive must be like HD-DVD add-on for 360, compatible with PC and Mac and able to play movies, not to record disks.

dialog_gvf

01-23-07, 07:57 PM

This BD-Drive must be like HD-DVD add-on for 360, compatible with PC and Mac and able to play movies, not to record disks.

Pioneer has announced a 5x BD-ROM/DVD-ROM/DVD+-R/RW burner combo drive.

But, wouldn't expect it get to $199 any time soon.

Gary

Talkstr8t

01-23-07, 09:10 PM

Talkstr8t

01-23-07, 09:11 PM

That's it? That's the whole survey? The question that comes up during the initial configuration of the PS3? That's what this is all based on? No, I was only discussing the questions related to Blu-ray usage. There were many other questions relating to interest in multi-player gaming, downloadable content, ease of setup, etc. As much as you'd like to characterize it as a skewed survey, it wasn't.

Talkstr8t

01-23-07, 09:14 PM

So we have about 300 high definition discs released so far that are 30GB or below (25GB and 30GB) and a dozen o rso that are over 30GBs (ie 50GB). Its seems that 30 GB is enough for most of those releasesSure, because most movies are short enough (especially when using advanced codecs) to fit on 25/30. But if you have a longer movie, or want to include multiple audio tracks, or want to provide extra bonus content, or want to include a second copy of the movie for portable use, or want to include a PS3 game, or want to bundle PS software, or want to include firmware updates for all known players, or want to support dozens of other possible scenarios where added content is of value to the consumer, you'll be far less able to on 30GB than 50GB.

trgraphics

01-23-07, 09:16 PM

This survey was only given to people that own the PS3? And you say it's not skewed? WOW.

Talkstr8t

01-23-07, 09:17 PM

[HD DVD has]an apparently more flexible and easier to implement interactive layerLess flexible, not more flexible. And we don't know if it's easier to implement (LG apparently couldn't do it, at least on the BH100). It's fair to say it's easier to create basic content on it (at least in advance of mature tool support), though not necessarily any easier than it is to use the comparable basic format, HDMV. Any claims beyond that are speculative at best.

Talkstr8t

01-23-07, 09:18 PM

This survey was only given to people that own the PS3? And you say it's not skewed? WOW.It's a survey about PS3 owners intended uses for the PS3. Are you suggesting surveying non-PS3 owners would be more accurate?!? Sheesh.

Steeb

01-23-07, 09:20 PM

jdg345

01-23-07, 09:24 PM

Do you think they are dropping because manufacturing costs are dropping? No, they're dropping because Blu-ray player (mostly PS3) and disc sales are cleaning HD DVD's clock and lowering the price still further is the only weapon they have left. And every time they do, they 've just made it less attractive for others to enter the market. How long can you play that game?
Initially, yes, by leveraging the proven subsidization model of game consoles. But a PS3 is clearly far more expensive to build than a standalone Blu-ray player need be, so I expect to see standalones emerge late this year at sub-PS3 prices.

Pretty much all speculation, yes?

I mean, that's all well and good for most people to do ... but when an Insider posts speculation, it tends to carry a little more weight.

No, I was only discussing the questions related to Blu-ray usage. There were many other questions relating to interest in multi-player gaming, downloadable content, ease of setup, etc. As much as you'd like to characterize it as a skewed survey, it wasn't.

The question is silly!

Survey: "Do you intend to use your PS3 to watch Blu-Ray Movies?"
Average Customer: "Gee, uhm, there's a Blu-Ray disc in the Box with my PS3. I'm not going to *not* watch it. Guess I should answer 'Yes' to this one."

Sheesh ... :rolleyes:

b2bonez

01-23-07, 09:26 PM

jdg345

01-23-07, 09:26 PM

Steeb

01-23-07, 09:27 PM

But a PS3 is clearly far more expensive to build than a standalone Blu-ray player need be, so I expect to see standalones emerge late this year at sub-PS3 prices.
Even though Sony executives have been quoted as saying it'll take 2-3 years for standalone BD players to hit the $299-$399 point? Are you guessing or do you know more than Sony does?

trgraphics

01-23-07, 09:50 PM

It's a survey about PS3 owners intended uses for the PS3. Are you suggesting surveying non-PS3 owners would be more accurate?!? Sheesh.

Let's see. If I run a survey with only A2 owners what do you think would be the outcome if they are asked if they intend to play HD DVD movies? 100% or only 80% like with the PS3?

Afterall, your one of the people saying that the PS3 is a standalone player aren't you? I know a lot of jaded fans, such as yourself, are.

What'sHD

01-23-07, 09:58 PM

It's a survey about PS3 owners intended uses for the PS3. Are you suggesting surveying non-PS3 owners would be more accurate?!? Sheesh.
Damn, sprayed coffee all over my keyboard.. damn you, Talk :D

P.S. Its a good thing my shirt was spared, otherwise you'd be in deep trouble.

Kosty

01-23-07, 10:35 PM

The current street price of the Xbox HD DVD add is around $149 and the HD A2 can be had for $449 or less with 3 HD DVDs. (and a Toshiba HDTV bundle promotion is diving a $200 instant rebate on a HDTV HD DVD bundle next week) so prices not only seem to be lower for HD DVD, they seem to be on their way to dropping much faster than those on the Blu-ray side. Do you think they are dropping because manufacturing costs are dropping? No, they're dropping because Blu-ray player (mostly PS3) and disc sales are cleaning HD DVD's clock and lowering the price still further is the only weapon they have left. And every time they do, they 've just made it less attractive for others to enter the market. How long can you play that game? Here I think your Blu-ray insider status gives you no more information than I have access to. :) I don't have the privilege to talk to the studios, and I appreciate you insider insights. But since I don't know exactly who you are and what your position is, I sometimes find it hard to me to consider exactly how much information of yours is based on hard information and how much is pure speculation. But I respect your request to remain unofficial and I appreciate your candor and honesty.

I feel its a great privilege to interact with all the insiders here. I feel I represent other home theater enthusiasts trying to gain information in this world of high definition formats and when I push for answers, its me acting as a proxy for others who share the same questions.

I always thank you for your detailed responses, and your time spent here. Thats pure speculation and a hopeful assumption on your part. You have probably zero information on Toshiba's internal costs or their production capacity for the HD A2 or Microsoft's costs for the Xbox 360 HD DVD player bundle.

I know that the HD A2 is cheaper to produce than the HD A1. HD A2 production levels are in the 100's of thousands (as is the Xbox 360 bundle), with corresponding economies of scale. The first generation HD DVD players and all of the Blu-ray players are being built in the 10's of thousands and don't have economy of scale to drive down costs. We all have an idea of the PS3 costs and its reasonabe to assume that Sony is indeed taking a loss on each unit there.

As a matter of fact, in this one very very specific case, I may actually have more first hand knowledge than you. (To be honest, that's a kinda weird feeling. just not used to that) :o , HD DVD's CES announcements of lower cost Chinese player development along with Onkyo LG and Meridian's announcements and Samsung's new HD DVD laptop are a bit in conflict with your speculation here.

It seemed that the PS3 was meant to be the low priced Blu-ray player and the other CE companies were going to attack the high end market with low volume high margin items. Initially, yes, by leveraging the proven subsidization model of game consoles. But a PS3 is clearly far more expensive to build than a standalone Blu-ray player need be, so I expect to see standalones emerge late this year at sub-PS3 prices. Then why do official BDA spokesman keep saying two or years before Blu-ray stand alones reach a under $500 price point.

dialog_gvf

01-23-07, 10:45 PM

Let's see. If I run a survey with only A2 owners what do you think would be the outcome if they are asked if they intend to play HD DVD movies? 100% or only 80% like with the PS3?

But, that isn't an interesting question to ask A2 owners. It is a significant question to ask PS/3 owners given the debates over the past 18 months about the effectiveness that the PS/3 would play in establishing the BD format.

For what it's worth, the survey measured INTENT, not current usage (which I would estimate at a maximum of 30% at this point). But, intent is what sells HDTV that will have the PS/3 hooked up to them to be used to play BD discs.

Gary

dialog_gvf

01-23-07, 10:48 PM

Then why do official BDA spokesman keep saying two or years before Blu-ray stand alones reach a under $500 price point.

I thought it was a Sony executive saying it would take two or three years for Sony players to reach the $299 level.

Gary

Kosty

01-23-07, 11:05 PM

I thought it was a Sony executive saying it would take two or three years for Sony players to reach the $299 level.

Gary That too, but I'm sure my assertion is valid, and fairly recent.

But even if your thought is the correct one, HD DVD may possibly reach that level this year, two years ahead of Sony. MSRP of some HD DVD players will probably be $399 this summer, with street prices $50 below that.

Do you think any Blu-ray device will hit that mark this year?

I'll try to find the quote when I can, but looking through all those Blu-ray interviews makes my head hurt. ;)

I'll stop saying it until I can find the quote, since you think my recollection may be faulty.

onanie

01-23-07, 11:15 PM

Let's see. If I run a survey with only A2 owners what do you think would be the outcome if they are asked if they intend to play HD DVD movies? 100% or only 80% like with the PS3?

Afterall, your one of the people saying that the PS3 is a standalone player aren't you? I know a lot of jaded fans, such as yourself, are.

If memory serves me right, 80% is a pretty good number for something that is never supposed to be used for movies.

Kosty

01-23-07, 11:21 PM

I thought it was a Sony executive saying it would take two or three years for Sony players to reach the $299 level.That too, but I'm sure my assertion is valid, and fairly recent.

But even if your thought is the correct one, HD DVD may possibly reach that level this year, two years ahead of Sony. MSRP of some HD DVD players will probably be $399 this summer, with street prices $50 below that.

Do you think any Blu-ray device will hit that mark this year?

I'll try to find the quote when I can, but looking through all those Blu-ray interviews makes my head hurt. ;)

I'll stop saying it until I can find the quote, since you think my recollection may be faulty.I may have been thinking of this and assuming the PS3 was going to be the lowest cost player throught that period. But that' s only till mid 2008...18 months from now...

http://www.gwn.com/news/story.php/id/11019/title/PS3_Price_Could_Remain_High_Until_2008.html

PS3 Price Could Remain High Until 2008

What all of this means is the PS3 could remain at its current price until mid-2008

Despite the high cost of development and production, Tretton was adamant that the continued high price of the console would not hurt sales in the long run:

"I think the consumers that get their hands on a PlayStation 3 clearly see the value and not only want to buy one for $599, in some instances they're willing to pay ridiculous prices to buy one on eBay."

Kosty

01-23-07, 11:46 PM

Of course all of this is relevent because price sells units

CES: Blue-laser wars (http://www.edn.com/article/CA6405883.html?spacedesc=opinions)

Before presenting the data, I'll re-emphasize that these are enthusiasts, presumably with much higher-than-average probability of pulling out their wallets each time some cool new tech toy appears.

Percentage of enthusiasts
surveyed who would buy
a high-definition DVD player

$1000 - 2%

$750 - 3%

$500 - 8%

$300 - 28%

$200 - 60%

$100 - 76%

2Channel

01-24-07, 12:09 AM

Good to see the DVD Empire's sales percentages for the week. BD has hit 60%.

HD-DVD: 39.01%
Blu-Ray: 60.99%

http://www.dvdempire.com/index.asp?userid=99365189011381&tab_id=60&site_id=69&site_media_id=0

Nice. :D

Interesting site Rob.

Format: HD-DVD Blu-Ray

Week: 39.01% 60.99%
Month: 42.87% 57.13%
Year: 57.54% 42.46%

Titles: 195 212
Studios: 18 17

Two questions, what's the sales volume like fo HD discs on dvdempire.com? and how can I get their studios list?

2Channel

01-24-07, 12:13 AM

Of course all of this is relevent because price sells units

Agreed. I believe we'll see Chinese branded HD-DVD and Blu-Ray players for Christmas 2007. We'll probably see the HD-DVD models a little sooner than the Blu-Ray models. I believe HD-DVD will continue to lead the charge on driving lower price points though.

2Channel

01-24-07, 12:37 AM

Link posted by sknight1 in the news thread

BackupBluray rip utility released
http://wesleytech.com/backupbluray-rip-utility-released/

The first Blu-ray Disc movie to fall victim to a backup and decryption appears to have been Lord Of War, from Lion’s Gate Films. After receiving BD-ROM video files and a memory dump, muslix64 was able to successfully decrypt the content. A powerful crypto attack was used to analyze the memory dump obtained from a Blu-ray Disc software player (such as WinDVD or PowerDVD). The crypto attack helped to identify the encryption keys that are needed for decrypting the video files. After the initial experiment was a success, muslix64 released the alpha version of BackupBluray. Soon thereafter, another Doom9 forum user reported a successful Blu-ray disc backup.

Any predictions on when we'll see the first titles with BD+ protection?

dialog_gvf

01-24-07, 12:57 AM

But even if your thought is the correct one, HD DVD may possibly reach that level this year, two years ahead of Sony. MSRP of some HD DVD players will probably be $399 this summer, with street prices $50 below that.

$399 SRP is definitely doable. Probably for one of the Chinese CE. My analysis shows $299 SRP is definitely not until the laser diodes get a lot cheaper.

Do you think any Blu-ray device will hit that mark this year?

I don't think anything from a traditional CE would hit that. But depending where the battle is, a company like BenQ could do it. But probably it would be $50 more ($449).

Keep in mind that unless they feel they must compete with HD DVD, they'll be looking at the other BD boxes as the competition.

Gary

dialog_gvf

01-24-07, 01:02 AM

Any predictions on when we'll see the first titles with BD+ protection?

When it is needed. BD+ would be used if AACS is compromised. It has not been. It is misappropriation of keys used for the normal operation of the player that has occured.

At some point future titles won't work with the player unless it is updated. And that will occur when the AACS-LA is sure that the vunerability has been fixed.

Some people are strutting around like they picked the toughest lock in existence, when in fact someone left the keys sitting under the mat out front.

Gary

2Channel

01-24-07, 01:04 AM

When it is needed. BD+ would be used if AACS is compromised. It has not been. It is misappropriation of keys used for the normal operation of the player that has occured.

At some point future titles won't work with the player unless it is updated. And that will occur when the AACS-LA is sure that the vunerability has been fixed.

Some people are strutting around like they picked the toughest lock in existence, when in fact someone left the keys sitting under the mat out front.

Gary

Hasn't muslix64 already cracked some AACS keys on HD-DVD?

dialog_gvf

01-24-07, 01:17 AM

Hasn't muslix64 already cracked some AACS keys on HD-DVD?

No. He took the keys and used them like the player does to decrypt the data. The player was supposed to protect those keys from being discovered in memory.

He created an application that uses a discovered key and decrypts the content into a file so that it is then free of copy protection.

Gary

2Channel

01-24-07, 01:34 AM

Another news article on the subject

Blu-ray Encryption Defeated
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=5795

The memory dump information caught the attention of Muslix64, who replied to the thread saying, “In less [than] 24 hours, without any Blu-Ray equipment, but with the help of Janvitos, I managed to decrypt and play a Blu-Ray media file using my known-plaintext attack.” Muslix64 then posted a file as an example of his decryption work, though he did say that his method does not address BD+.

Muslix64 then went on to explain how he was able to accomplish this feat with his plaintext attack method. “This is a very basic, but [powerful] crypto attack that I have used to decrypt both [HD DVD and Blu-ray] formats,” he wrote. “After reading posts of people trying to get the keys in memory, I realized, I have a different way of looking into the problem…A lot of people try to attack the software, I'm attacking the data!”

“So I spent more time analysing the data, to look for patterns or something special to mount my known-plaintext attack,” Muslix64 explains. “Because I know the keys are unprotected in memory, I can skip all the [painful] process of code reversal.”

Although Muslix64 did not have any Blu-ray equipment at his disposal, he was still able to recover the keys with the help of Janvitos’ memory dump file and media file. Blu-ray media files are divided into individual aligned units. The first 16 bytes of each unit are not encrypted, with the rest being encrypted using AES in CBC mode. Muslix64 examined the non-encrypted portions of the data and found a reoccurring pattern, which he used to mount his known-plaintext attack.

Muslix64 goes on: “In most cases, the know-plaintext attack is in fact a guessed-plaintext attack. We ‘assume’ the data will look like something we ‘guessed’ when decrypted. Most of the time, it works! Knowing that, all you have to do, is to write a small program that scan a memory dump file, that comes from of a software player while it was playing the movie. The key is in that file, you have to locate it.”

dialog_gvf

01-24-07, 01:48 AM

OK, I think I get it. I beleive he is talking about how he found the key offset in the memory dump file.

He guesses how a block will look decoded, and then he starts applying sections of the memory dump to an encrypted block. When he gets something that looks like his guess, he has found an offset candidate. He can then apply the candidate key to a longer section of content and see if he gets something real, or noise.

The other way is to reverse engineer the actual machine code to determine where it is reading the keys.

Gary

2Channel

01-24-07, 01:50 AM

No. He took the keys and used them like the player does to decrypt the data. The player was supposed to protect those keys from being discovered in memory.

He created an application that uses a discovered key and decrypts the content into a file so that it is then free of copy protection.

Gary

I just saw three keys posted on the usual hang out site for muslix64 and Janvitos. Aren't those the decrypted keys? Or am I missing something?

dialog_gvf

01-24-07, 01:51 AM

I just saw three keys posted on the usual hang out site for muslix64 and Janvitos. Aren't those the decrypted keys? Or am I missing something?

No, those are the real keys that the player would use to decrypt the content.

Encrypted data -> Apply decryption key -> decrypted data -> to file or decoder.

The decryption key (volume key/media key) comes from media key block which has the same key(s) encrypted many times with each vendor key.

Basically, the vendor key decodes the vendor's slot of the media key block to obtain the key used to decrypt the data on the disc.

So, shutting down a player means poisoning its section of the media key block in subsequent discs. The vendor acquires a new slot, and the player is updated to use that.

Gary

Timothy Ramzyk

01-24-07, 02:26 AM

amirm

01-24-07, 02:37 AM

Welcome to thread. But note that discussions can get quite hot here :).

Am I right in the knowledge that HD is thus far region free?
Yes. All discs and players are region free. There have been some discussions in DVD Forum about adding region control but they don't seem to go anywhere right now as the support does not exist for it. Even if something did come about, it would not be retroactive which means if you buy a player now, it will play all discs you buy in the future.

The extra gig may mean a lot to gamers, it means nothing to me. I really don't bother much with “special features” on my current DVDs. I have three-thousand and have only watched about half, let alone partake of the many extras. The pop-up video features actually sound kinda annoying. It's pretty clear that you don't need beyond 30 to present an excellent image, as neither camp has used much more than that.
Wow, 3000 DVDs? You are a serious movie collector :).

I'm told HD does a better job upconverting DVDs, and actually I find Toshiba's more integrated, pro-backwards compatibility approach refreshing. I was told Sony didn't build a lot of backward compatibility into their platform until Toshiba made it clear the consumer was really adamant about the issue.
Actually, blu-ray group did try to make combo discs that play in normal DVD players but at the end, it proved pretty difficult to manufacture so they gave up.

I have no idea who's gonna win, my hunch is HD, it appeals to me more anyway. I think it's more logical sounding to the consumer buying that first Hi-def TV or projector, no one will “see” the difference, and I think HD is going to hit the tipping-point price barrier long before BD. The worst thing that would happen if I bought a HD-DVD player is that I'd have a really good, region-free, upconverting DVD player, and only have tossed a few hundred at it.
Given your interest in international titles, the HD DVD does have a leg up currently because it is so much easier to produce it worldwide. We already have 40 studios/distributors producing HD DVDs and we have trained many post production houses to encode and author the same. So if you are a type of person who enjoys independent content, then HD DVD has a lead today and will keep it that way.

I think both formats suck equally for not allowing HD to pass over component cables too, as my SONY HD video projector will never be able to show either of them and that why at the time, I spent the big bucks on it rather than go with a cheapy low-rez machine.
Actually, both formats do allow component output. There is a flag that could be set to reduce the resolution by a factor of four but neither camp is setting it. Even if they did set it, you get the output just not at full resolution.

Anyway, hope you take the plunge soon. You won't believe the first time you watch an HD DVD movie. Even though my group builds the stuff, I was speechless the first time I saw it on my home theater.

burbank

01-24-07, 03:50 AM

No, I was only discussing the questions related to Blu-ray usage. There were many other questions relating to interest in multi-player gaming, downloadable content, ease of setup, etc. As much as you'd like to characterize it as a skewed survey, it wasn't.

But one question is not enough to really determine what the public is saying. A good survey asks the same question in several different ways to validate the survey results.

Kosty

01-24-07, 04:47 AM

Hey ladies and gentlemen,

I'm new, I had this forum recommended to me as a generally more civil place to talk about the “format war.” I haven't plunged yet, but I lean heavy HD-DVD.

My criteria being,

I'm a movie collector, not a gamer and the low-cost and less fussy production demands of HD are going to make it more attractive for small labels to start releasing sooner. The first year of any formats life is usually a wash with boring mass-appeal titles that get better masterings down the road, even if I did care about them.

Am I right in the knowledge that HD is thus far region free? If so thats a biggie to me and I hope it stays that way as it would truly be a universal format. I already see some more interesting stuff coming out of France than we currently offer. I think multi-region BD players would be a looong wait.

My prediction is HD will be a less temperamental format, I've heard the “grooves” are larger and laser less modified than on BD systems. Wasn't that why Sony needed to create a slimmer disk then come up with a varnish to protect it?

The extra gig may mean a lot to gamers, it means nothing to me. I really don't bother much with “special features” on my current DVDs. I have three-thousand and have only watched about half, let alone partake of the many extras. The pop-up video features actually sound kinda annoying. It's pretty clear that you don't need beyond 30 to present an excellent image, as neither camp has used much more than that.

I'm told HD does a better job upconverting DVDs, and actually I find Toshiba's more integrated, pro-backwards compatibility approach refreshing. I was told Sony didn't build a lot of backward compatibility into their platform until Toshiba made it clear the consumer was really adamant about the issue.

I have no idea who's gonna win, my hunch is HD, it appeals to me more anyway. I think it's more logical sounding to the consumer buying that first Hi-def TV or projector, no one will “see” the difference, and I think HD is going to hit the tipping-point price barrier long before BD. The worst thing that would happen if I bought a HD-DVD player is that I'd have a really good, region-free, upconverting DVD player, and only have tossed a few hundred at it.

I think both formats suck equally for not allowing HD to pass over component cables too, as my SONY HD video projector will never be able to show either of them and that why at the time, I spent the big bucks on it rather than go with a cheapy low-rez machine.
Welcome to the forum. As Amirm stated, the discussion can become very heated here, but for the most part still civil.

Their are some incredibly gifted and intelligent people here, neutral and on both sides of this debate, enthusiasts and industry insiders that are discussing some pretty involved topics in the HD format battle.

Don't be afraid. Logic and a rational thought processes are your friend.

Be prepared to have your logic challenged but the moderators here do an amazing job of allowing a balance of free expression of thought and a tone of overall civility here. This is the best place on the planet to discuss these issues.
Attack the logic or the assumption but not the poster and you'll be fine.

Contribute and teach us something. Were all actively trying to find some truths in this incredibly nuanced subject.

Tempers may flare a bit, but don't let that fool you. The people here may be passionate , but that 's because most of us are excited and a bit emotional about the prospect of movies being shown in the best manner they have ever been in our lifetimes.

Welcome to the conversation. :)

So jump on in, don't be shy, you'll own bleed a little bit from the sharp analysis of your posts. But in the end a greater truth emerges.

Kosty

01-24-07, 04:59 AM

BasementBob

01-24-07, 05:18 AM

Timothy Ramzyk

You might want to seek out posts by amirm , and that interview link with him as well.
He has an obvious HD-DVD and VC1 bias, but I learned a lot of things I didn't know before.

BasementBob

01-24-07, 05:23 AM

Rob Zuber

Good to see the DVD Empire's sales percentages for the week. BD has hit 60%.
HD-DVD: 39.01%
Blu-Ray: 60.99%
I don't think that's indicitive of the future of BluRay vs HD-DVD, or the quality of either.
Simply put, in January, there haven't been any HD-DVD titles that I'm interested in (I bought all the good stuff last year), so I've been buying BluRay exclusively since new years day.
So, although I own 3 times as many HD-DVDs, this month my spending would be
HD-DVD: 0.00%
Blu-Ray: 100.00%
However, if new HD-DVD titles appear for movies I want, I will buy them without pause.

BasementBob

01-24-07, 05:24 AM

Kosty:

I have 2100 DVDs (http://www.bobgolds.com/Shelves/home.htm).
When the cable goes out, it's not a problem. :)

BluRay will survive as long as Studios are exclusive to it, or until something better comes along they also release their content onto.

jdg345

01-24-07, 09:11 AM

rdjam

01-24-07, 09:12 AM

Parsons and Sheppard said that the lower price point for HD DVD players isn't a hindrance for Blu-ray adoption, and questioned whether Toshiba has a feasible business model when players are sold at a loss.

"It's cheap, but maybe it's cheap for a reason," said Parsons. "If someone wants to spend $499 on a player, they should get a PS3."

Real class act there Parsons. BD is known by its friends
I think Parsons forgot to say "smiley face" at the end :p

scaesare

01-24-07, 09:20 AM

Sure, because most movies are short enough (especially when using advanced codecs) to fit on 25/30. But if you have a longer movie, or want to include multiple audio tracks, or want to provide extra bonus content, or want to include a second copy of the movie for portable use, or want to include a PS3 game, or want to bundle PS software, or want to include firmware updates for all known players, or want to support dozens of other possible scenarios where added content is of value to the consumer, you'll be far less able to on 30GB than 50GB.

Many of your scenarios above should have "and" instead of "or". That drops the number of cases where discs today have proved insufficient to a rather small number, which was Kosty's point. Your phrasing makes it sound like any one of the requirements above requires >25-30GB.

Today, there are "longer" 3+ hour movies. There are multiple audio tracks. There is extras bonus content. There are discs with several GB's left over that you could include software on. Or include firmware.

Now, you have a valid point if you require 3+ hours AND multiple high-bitrate audio tracks. Or if you want many hours of xtra's AND multiple lossless tracks. Or a 3-hour movie AND DTS audio, AND several GB for PC software. The point is that these are corner cases were a second disc is not a killer.

And several of your scenarios are open-ended can be more efficiently done (like lossless is more efficient than PCM), such as transcoding rather than including a entirely separate movie. Or what's to say that if you want to include additional software, the several GB available on many discs is not enough?

Timothy Ramzyk

01-24-07, 09:22 AM

Timothy;

3000 titles scares me. I thought I was serious with 350 DVDs and 55 HD DVDs. :)

I also agree that HD DVD's superior SD DVD upconversion strategy in every player since launch has convinced me to support HD DVD, although I think that Blu-ray as a format will survive for many years throughout the lifecycle of the PS3. Lower prices overall for HD DVD players is a large factor also.

BTW, HD DVD will pass full resolution od HD DVD over component. Upconverted SD DVD is is limited to HDMI as a legacy of the older DVD CSS copy scheme.

Great! and thanks for the welcome all. I actually have one of those DVDO gizmos and a Pioneer Elite (code-free) player for my up-converting needs, and have been quite happy with the results. My projector has widescreen pannels, and the DVDO is great for toggling between ratios.

3000 may sound like a lot of DVDs (and objectively it is), but I know guys who can put me to shame with double that. I'm pushing 40, a lot of them are in their 50's, so sometimes I have to tease with a "Hey, you've out-bought your lifespan" jibe. :)

I actually won't be surprised if both formats survive, at least until so many players are dual format, that it won't mean much which format you own. I think Hi-def manufacturers are way out of touch if they think any format is going to sweep DVD out like DVD swept VHS and laserdiscs.

I walk my dog through a well-to-do neighborhood every night, and windows blaze with huge HD TVs that must have cost more than my car, yet their owners seem to be fond of animation given the bright orange flesh-tones, radioactive-turf and detail-blasting contrast on display. My point? Were tech-geeks, and highly attuned to details that even high-end consumers don't have much regard for. VHS to DVD was an obvious leap, even in the wrong hands. This one? Not so much. Most wouldn't bother at all if it weren't forced on them, and I'm not even sure it has much "keeping up with the Joneses" appeal.

So I think price is going to speak louder than grand claims about features, that will go largely unnoticed and unused anyway. If you want to see eyes glaze over fast, try explaining anything about HD beyond "it gives a much more detailed picture" to a non-enthusiast; let alone anything about the finer points between two blue-laser systems. I can't tell you how many groans I get from friends and family when were watching a movie, and the urge to make a 5-second tweak to my system overcomes me.

rdjam

01-24-07, 09:33 AM

I just saw three keys posted on the usual hang out site for muslix64 and Janvitos. Aren't those the decrypted keys? Or am I missing something?
Yes, they are the keys - but the version of the bluraybackup software muslix has released so farcannot use the Volume Unique Key (VUP) which is called CPS on Bluray.

Perhaps in another version or two...

Grubert

01-24-07, 09:39 AM

From cdrinfo (http://www.cdrinfo.com/Sections/News/Details.aspx?NewsId=19572)

A new study from ABI Research forecasts that universal Hign Definition players will become the norm, not the exception, benefiting confused consumers unwilling to commit to one DVD camp or the other.

- Forecast sales: 2.4 million players in 2007, rising to 55 million in 2011.

- Universal player prices will have to drop below $200 before true mass adoption takes off. That should happen by 2009.

Kosty

01-24-07, 09:48 AM

^^^

ABI Research believes that prices will have to drop below $200 before true mass adoption takes off. That should happen by 2009." First format to $199 players wins :) (at least 70% of market ;) )

HD DVD could have $399 MSRP & $299 street pricing the end of this year.

Ripnickus

01-24-07, 09:55 AM

This survey was only given to people that own the PS3? And you say it's not skewed? WOW.

??

Kosty

01-24-07, 10:06 AM

?? Talkstr8t was refereing to a result of a survey that was given to PS3 owners while they were setting up or registering their machines.

One of the survey questions was something to the effect of " Do you intend to use the Blu-ray drive to play Blu-ray movies?".

Talkstr8t mentioned that the response rate was 80% and implied that number was the accurate number of PS3 users that would use the PS3 or intended to use the PS3 as a Blu-ray player.

Several posters here pointed out that, many people would choose that option in a setup menu just to make sure that feature was enabled and that it may not be an accurate method of determining the number of people that would actually use the device in that manner.

nataraj

01-24-07, 10:40 AM

I'm new, I had this forum recommended to me as a generally more civil place to talk about the “format war.”

Welcome. What forum are you coming from .... sounds like a scary place ;)

Ilka

01-24-07, 10:46 AM

Good to see the DVD Empire's sales percentages for the week. BD has hit 60%.

HD-DVD: 39.01%
Blu-Ray: 60.99%

http://www.dvdempire.com/index.asp?userid=99365189011381&tab_id=60&site_id=69&site_media_id=0

Nice. :D

So now the ratio of BD/HD-DVD sales has increased to ~1.5 ... maybe they were correct when they predicted it will be ~3-~4 soon ... maybe this war will be over sooner, rather than later. Check out:

http://www.hdgamedb.com/amazon/history.aspx

... and select the 14-day history. More indications that Blu-Ray is pulling away.

Kosty

01-24-07, 11:04 AM

Welcome. What forum are you coming from .... sounds like a scary place ;) Apparently here we only use rhetorical hand to hand weapons including traditional edged blades and blunt objects. Sharp cuts to illogical assumptions and deeply bruised egos are the result.

They must use firearms and artillery.

Butler5

01-24-07, 11:05 AM

All those Xbox addons must really be popular... Even QVC has them now.. ;)

http://www.qvc.com/qic/qvcapp.aspx/main.detail.tpl.DETAIL.item.E174907.ref.CJ8/aol_refer.false/msn_refer.false/ref.CJ8?cm_ven=SHOPPINGFEED&cm_cat=ELECTRONICS&cm_pla=VIDEO%20GAMES&cm_ite=E174907

b2b

QVC also has PS3 Bundles!!!! So What are you saying

Kosty

01-24-07, 11:05 AM

So now the ratio of BD/HD-DVD sales has increased to ~1.5 ... maybe they were correct when they predicted it will be ~3-~4 soon ... maybe this war will be over sooner, rather than later. Check out:

http://www.hdgamedb.com/amazon/history.aspx

... and select the 14-day history. More indications that Blu-Ray is pulling away. Granted Blu-ray sales have increased but its January with no new HD DVD releases. Wait a couple weeks.

Theory on PS3 sales affecting the Blu-ray movie sales. What happens if trend continues , what happens if trend drops and HD DVD pull away

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=793107

DTV TiVo Dealer

01-24-07, 11:08 AM

^^^

First format to $199 players wins :) (at least 70% of market ;) )

HD DVD could have $399 MSRP & $299 street pricing the end of this year.

So help me, I've got little old ladies upgrading to XA2s from their A2's I sold them last month and adding second and third HD DVD players to other HDTV in their houses.

We have an extremely high attach rate of HD DVD players to new HDTV sales and so many of our customers tell me the very best part of their new HDTV viewing experience is the HD DVD player and that they watch a lot more movies in SD and HD than ever before.

HD is additive, I believe Toshiba may need to add a caution labels "Use of this player may be habit forming" to their player soon.

-Robert

Timothy Ramzyk

01-24-07, 11:13 AM

Now, you have a valid point if you require 3+ hours AND multiple high-bitrate audio tracks. Or if you want many hours of xtra's AND multiple lossless tracks. Or a 3-hour movie AND DTS audio, AND several GB for PC software. The point is that these are corner cases were a second disc is not a killer.

I agree there, you see a lot of 2-DVD special editions, that seem to have the second disk more or less for the purpose of selling the upgrade of a title previously released. In this case the second disk itself becomes a selling-point whether of not it was truly needed to support the extras.

That's why the whole DVD-18 thing mystified me. At least it proved there is no real reason to pack ten pounds in an eight-pound bag, given the consequences. The actual disk is the cheapest thing in the case, being stingy with them is kinda pointless other than to save shelf space.

Also, I kind of cringe when I have to reach for a DVD from the first few years of production, so many don't hold up, yet now I almost never see the kind of compression flaws so common to those earlier releases. My point being, that it isn't just about GB, it's also about production and playback technology, and I have no doubt that either format is going to succeed in maxing out the limitations of our TVs and sound systems, even if held to 30 GB (though I hear 51 GB HD-DVDs are just around the corner).

Gaming? Again, that's not my bag, but from the outside it seems given to wild fluctuations in technology compared to audio and video formats. So I see no reason to think any disc will remain a long-term standard in a field evolving to that degree.

Ilka

01-24-07, 11:16 AM

Granted Blu-ray sales have increased but its January with no new HD DVD releases. Wait a couple weeks.

Compare http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/releasedates.html to http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/releasedates.html

Take March for example ... 3 HD-DVD releases, 2 of which are also Blu-Ray. Compared to ~14 for Blu-Ray (including exclusive "Casino Royale").

This is going to get a lot worse before it gets better ... even after Universal's announcment:

April 17, 2007
The Game (Universal)
The Jerk (Universal)

dialog_gvf

01-24-07, 11:19 AM

HD is additive, I believe Toshiba may need to add a caution labels "Use of this player may be habit forming" to their player soon.

:D

I think maybe the governments need to consider that on all HD disc players. Oh my poor bank account! :)

Gary

dialog_gvf

01-24-07, 11:25 AM

From cdrinfo (http://www.cdrinfo.com/Sections/News/Details.aspx?NewsId=19572)

Many observers expect that the demands of supporting both formats would significantly increase the price of universal players. While there is some additional cost in the optical pickup and the LG player's initial price is quite steep at $1200, Wilson expects these prices to drop dramatically as new manufacturers come to market with universal players.

But, the single format player will ALWAYS be able to be made cheaper. So, how do claims of universal dominance jive with the claims that the first $199 player dominates?

I see universal players as a psychological gap jumper. I believe the mere presence of the universal player means the consumer doesn't have to worry about the format war any more. But, I don't think that means they buy a universal player.

The logic is that they can go for the best value (subjective), and realize if their format choice ends up being the wrong one they can always get a universal player in the future. And they will realize that this future player purchase will probably be cheaper than their single-format choice of today.

Gary

dialog_gvf

01-24-07, 12:23 PM

Kosty

01-24-07, 12:40 PM

HD is additive,

I believe Toshiba may need to add a caution labels "Use of this player may be habit forming" to their player soon. Its the closest thing to a digital drug that I have ever seen. :)

b2bonez

01-24-07, 12:50 PM

I said Sony has a 2-day maximum encoding allowance for their titles. In the past they used real-time MEPG-2 encoders and claimed that no software encoder could fit the bill since encoding and tuning would take more than 2 days.
Not so. They have a MINIMUM 2-day encoding allowance.

Paidgeek has said they've managed to do some titles in two days. Not all titles.

Gary

The actual quote is...

Just to be clear, we will spend a minimum of two days on a title encoded in MPEG2. For the most challenging titles a several days to a week may be spent.

Funny how it's "Blu-Ray can do no right" and "HD-DVD can do no wrong" spin that always comes from the HD-DVD camp... :rolleyes:

b2b

Kosty

01-24-07, 12:54 PM

But, the single format player will ALWAYS be able to be made cheaper. So, how do claims of universal dominance jive with the claims that the first $199 player dominates?

I see universal players as a psychological gap jumper. I believe the mere presence of the universal player means the consumer doesn't have to worry about the format war any more. But, I don't think that means they buy a universal player.

The logic is that they can go for the best value (subjective), and realize if their format choice ends up being the wrong one they can always get a universal player in the future. And they will realize that this future player purchase will probably be cheaper than their single-format choice of today.

Gary That was exactly may take from the press and the crowds I saw looking at the LG CES stage event and demos for the BH100. I talked to a lot of people there. The LG Super Blue Player won the CES Best of Show from CNET, it was major buzz.

They loved the concept of a universal player because it reduced the risk of buying into the HD formats.

It was not the fact that universal players were great in itself but because consumers could buy anything and not be concerned of their new disc becoming frisbees.

Cheaper universal players would eventually be around to play anything you bought. So buy either format. You couldn't lose.

I thought that would then favor the cheaper format. Right now that's HD DVD,

That partially explained why so many Blu-ray guys there were not happy about it and the HD DVD people were happy. HD DVD guys were also happy because the HD DVD video shown on it looked good and it was an implication that both formats were equal in stunning picture and audio quality.

skogan

01-24-07, 01:08 PM

Funny how it's "Blu-Ray can do no right" and "HD-DVD can do no wrong" spin that always comes from the HD-DVD camp... :rolleyes:

b2b

This phrase strikes me as ironic, in as much as it is spin coming from the Blu-ray camp, and it says it HD DVD always does wrong, by always claiming BD does wrong. I don't know, just kind of ironic.... that is all.

Kosty

01-24-07, 01:12 PM

I don't know, just kind of ironic.... that is all. ...its because he's spinning so fast around in circles that he's hitting his own arse instead ....

Grubert

01-24-07, 01:25 PM

This phrase strikes me as ironic, in as much as it is spin coming from the Blu-ray camp, and it says it HD DVD always does wrong, by always claiming BD does wrong. I don't know, just kind of ironic.... that is all.

And it strikes me as ironic (though not surprising) that neither you nor Kosty find fault with the convenient MS misquoting of what paidgeek said.

Tim Glover

01-24-07, 01:31 PM

So help me, I've got little old ladies upgrading to XA2s from their A2's I sold them last month and adding second and third HD DVD players to other HDTV in their houses.

We have an extremely high attach rate of HD DVD players to new HDTV sales and so many of our customers tell me the very best part of their new HDTV viewing experience is the HD DVD player and that they watch a lot more movies in SD and HD than ever before.

HD is additive, I believe Toshiba may need to add a caution labels "Use of this player may be habit forming" to their player soon.

-Robert

:D

b2bonez

01-24-07, 01:41 PM

This phrase strikes me as ironic, in as much as it is spin coming from the Blu-ray camp, and it says it HD DVD always does wrong, by always claiming BD does wrong. I don't know, just kind of ironic.... that is all.

Actually HD-DVD has done a lot of things right. Excellent PQ on early titles. A vigorous grass-roots campaign with early adopters (right here on AVS no less... ;) ). Cheap players as a selling point and a few others I'm sure you could remark on..

But .....

The overarching fault of HD-DVD is the core technology it is based on. In the rush to be first to market they went with a disc spec. that was totally lacking in both bandwidth and storage capacity because of wanting to cling to the existing DVD disc replication technology. That and the lack of exclusive studio support (which I would guess is rooted in the poor disc design) has left it with little CE industry support and a marketing strategy based on cheap HW prices.

The fruits of those blunders will become quite clear in the time ahead... :)

b2b

skogan

01-24-07, 01:48 PM

And it strikes me as ironic (though not surprising) that neither you nor Kosty find fault with the convenient MS misquoting of what paidgeek said.

I didn't even read what Paidgeek said Grubert. How do you know that I don't find fault with it? I was just browsing, and saw that little bit of internal self-contradiction and pointed it out, and I tried to do it in a way that showed I was just making a side observation that wasn't directly related to the point of controversy. Maybe I should have added a smiley face too. Here, have a belated one: :)

Here is another side observation for you: You must not have found my statement ironic, if you didn't find it surprising. Irony is getting the opposite of the expected result, so if you expected it, it wasn't ironic. Therefore, you can't really find something ironic (though not surprising). Maybe you meant hypocritical.

Edit: Here, have another smiley face :)

WayneL

01-24-07, 01:49 PM

Actually HD-DVD has done a lot of things right. Excellent PQ on early titles. A vigorous grass-roots campaign with early adopters (right here on AVS no less... ;) ). Cheap players as a selling point and a few others I'm sure you could remark on..

But .....

The overarching fault of HD-DVD is the core technology it is based on. In the rush to be first to market they went with a disc spec. that was totally lacking in both bandwidth and storage capacity because of wanting to cling to the existing DVD disc replication technology. That and the lack of exclusive studio support (which I would guess is rooted in the poor disc design) has left it with little CE industry support and a marketing strategy based on cheap HW prices.

The fruits of those blunders will become quite clear in the time ahead... :)

b2b
b2b as usual make much of little. Fractional increase in disk capacity that is rarely usefully used.

WayneL

01-24-07, 01:52 PM

And it strikes me as ironic (though not surprising) that neither you nor Kosty find fault with the convenient MS misquoting of what paidgeek said.
MS is capable and available to correct any mis-statements, but
- has there been a change in Sony's criteria?
- have they ever said or done anything different?
- is Paidgeek being 100% transparent?

skogan

01-24-07, 01:54 PM

Actually HD-DVD has done a lot of things right. Excellent PQ on early titles. A vigorous grass-roots campaign with early adopters (right here on AVS no less... ;) ). Cheap players as a selling point and a few others I'm sure you could remark on..

But .....

The overarching fault of HD-DVD is the core technology it is based on. In the rush to be first to market they went with a disc spec. that was totally lacking in both bandwidth and storage capacity because of wanting to cling to the existing DVD disc replication technology. That and the lack of exclusive studio support (which I would guess is rooted in the poor disc design) has left it with little CE industry support and a marketing strategy based on cheap HW prices.

The fruits of those blunders will become quite clear in the time ahead... :)

b2b

I just don't really care that much anymore... not like I used to anyway. I come back now to post now and again, and to see if anything is going on, but I'm pretty happy now matter how it turns out really.

Dahlsim

01-24-07, 01:55 PM

The overarching fault of HD-DVD is the core technology it is based on. In the rush to be first to market they went with a disc spec. that was totally lacking in both bandwidth and storage capacity because of wanting to cling to the existing DVD disc replication technology. That and the lack of exclusive studio support (which I would guess is rooted in the poor disc design) has left it with little CE industry support and a marketing strategy based on cheap HW prices.

The fruits of those blunders will become quite clear in the time ahead... :)

b2b

It might be comforting to an early adopter type to think that 'superior spec' ultimately wins the day but I doubt it's rooted in much reality. If blu-ray wins it'll be because hd-dvd studios Warner & Paramount went to neutral and their stated reasons were mostly due to the PS3 million man trojan strategy. Credit Sony with digging deep into the pocket and launching a new format from a powerful existing brand.

Capacity is nice but truly overrated here IMHO as we see huge releases coming on single layer bd and in fact most BD is being delivered on 25gig disks, less than majority of hd-dvd disks at 30gig. So how is capacity the big factor here when a format is selling it's best stuff on 25gig and apparently BD users (I'm one too) are quite content to buy it, even the early adopters?

Bandwidth too is clearly a minor advantage when we see beautiful PQ and AQ already delivered on movies w/o the use of high bandwidths. Spec advantages are nice but there's not much difference here in reality.

Rich Peterson

01-24-07, 01:56 PM

That was exactly may take from the press and the crowds I saw looking at the LG CES stage event and demos for the BH100. I talked to a lot of people there. The LG Super Blue Player won the CES Best of Show from CNET, it was major buzz.

They loved the concept of a universal player because it reduced the risk of buying into the HD formats.
What sticks with me from LG's CES press conference was when LG was asked why they thought others weren't doing the dual-format players the spokesperson responded (paraphrasing) that they thought others would like to do a dual-format player but perhaps weren't technically capable at this time. He mentioned that LG happened to have experience with both types of optical systems so they were able to do it with more ease than others maybe will. Self-promotion? Perhaps, but I thought it was an interesting comment.

Ilka

01-24-07, 02:02 PM

...

Capacity is nice but truly overrated here IMHO as we see huge releases like Casino Royale coming on single layer bd and in fact most BD is being delivered on 25gig disks, less than majority of hd-dvd disks at 30gig. ...

http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/casinoroyale.html

Casino Royale is not a SL disk, it is DL 50GB, with AVC video encoding ... I'm expecting some pretty major extras on the disk also, so we'll see how much is "wasted".

Dahlsim

01-24-07, 02:08 PM

http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/casinoroyale.html

Casino Royale is not a SL disk, it is DL 50GB, with AVC video encoding ... I'm expecting some pretty major extras on the disk also, so we'll see how much is "wasted".

My mistake, I was looking at Open Season. Actually I think it's nice that some BD50's are coming thru, although I can't honestly say they look or even sound any better for me, it's a nice luxury to have.

My point still stands though that I look at my collection of BD and HD-DVD and I have overwhelmingly BD25 and HD-DVD30 on the shelf. So if capacity is that important then are we getting shortchanged now on all the BD25s we are buying? How long is BD25 ok for the superior spec format to use?

WayneL

01-24-07, 02:13 PM

darinp2

01-24-07, 02:18 PM

dialog_gvf

01-24-07, 02:46 PM

I thought that would then favor the cheaper format. Right now that's HD DVD,

That partially explained why so many Blu-ray guys there were not happy about it and the HD DVD people were happy. HD DVD guys were also happy because the HD DVD video shown on it looked good and it was an implication that both formats were equal in stunning picture and audio quality.

I believe I've been consistent in supporting the idea of universal players, specifically because of the psychological impact.

I really don't think it has any affect either way on the particular choice. The price argument is easily countered with the studio argument. So, the choice they make really gets back to the exact same things we debate here. I believe there were a lot of non-adopting early adopter types that were waiting for some sort of resolution.

I believe some BD supporters think it's a waste of energy to support one extra studio. But, as I said, I think it's invaluable for the psychological factor. We can all recommend to our friends to buy in without guilt. There is no longer any risk.

I guess up to now was the phony war. :D

Gary

UxiSXRD

01-24-07, 02:48 PM

I didn't even read what Paidgeek said Grubert. How do you know that I don't find fault with it? I was just browsing, and saw that little bit of internal self-contradiction and pointed it out, and I tried to do it in a way that showed I was just making a side observation that wasn't directly related to the point of controversy. Maybe I should have added a smiley face too. Here, have a belated one: :)

It's only two or three posts up from the one you quoted. Do you always jump in without checking for the context of a quote you find ironic? :confused: Hmm... I can't seem to edit that so it doesn't sound acrimonious, but my tone is intended to be more inquisivitve (if a bit incredulous) rather than combative.

Insert winky emoticon here.

UxiSXRD

01-24-07, 02:49 PM

cctvtech

01-24-07, 02:55 PM

What would really get me to buy would be a player that supports all three (plus) formats: HD DVD, Blu-ray and CD/SACD/HDCD.

amirm

01-24-07, 02:56 PM

Not so. They have a MINIMUM 2-day encoding allowance.

Paidgeek has said they've managed to do some titles in two days. Not all titles.

Gary
Well, until Paidgeek tells us who he is, I go by direct information I have from Sony on why they didn't want to use VC-1. They were absolutely dedicated to finishing a title in two days or else.

Clearly the attitude has changed with their AVC encoder and glacial pace that it uses to encode. So maybe they are more open to VC-1 now that they know how bad things could be with AVC :).

Grubert

01-24-07, 02:57 PM

MS is capable and available to correct any mis-statements, but
- has there been a change in Sony's criteria?
- have they ever said or done anything different?

Sony has always emphasized encoding speed, and many thought their initial compression jobs seemed rush. But I don't think specific times were given up to now.

- is Paidgeek being 100% transparent?

No insider is being 100% transparent. They never lie, but they always phrase very carefully their statements so that the average person will read them in the most favourable way for their position. "BD is MPEG-2 only", "A replication insider told me BD50 is science fiction," you know the stuff.

But sometimes an insider says something that is outright wrong. As in saying "maximum" for "minimum", in what I have no reason to doubt is an honest mistake. :)

dialog_gvf

01-24-07, 02:57 PM

What about if we would just like to have had 24/48 lossless (TrueHD is fine for that) on Miami Vice? One reason I would like to see HD DVD add 51GB discs with 1.5x spin rate is because I think they would have given us real lossless for that if that disc was ready and reasonable to use.

The thing here is, right now Warner is really fighting the TL51 concept with the Total HD one.

The TL51 is a dual-sided DVD structure. That would be difficult to accomplish with Total HD. They'd need to create the second side layer on the bottom of a BD compatible 0.5mm substrate. :eek:

The ultimate Total HD disc would be a rather intensely expensive thing to make.

The other thing is, Total HD seems to be abandoning the idea of HD/DVD combos that Warner likes. So, what's going to happen there? Is the HD DVD side of Total HD going to be HD DVD-15/DVD-5 combos?

Gary

nataraj

01-24-07, 02:57 PM

What about if we would just like to have had 24/48 lossless (TrueHD is fine for that) on Miami Vice? One reason I would like to see HD DVD add 51GB discs with 1.5x spin rate is because I think they would have given us real lossless for that if that disc was ready and reasonable to use.

There is no science to support that 24/48 is any better than say 20/48. And I've not seen any DB tests that show even golden ears can distinguish between high bitrate DD+ and lossless.

Having said this, I fully support increased bandwidth as I had speculated would happen a few months back in a PM to you, along with TL. From what CJ and other insiders have written, it is clear that bandwidth can be a limiting factor at times.

dialog_gvf

01-24-07, 02:59 PM

There is no science to support that 24/48 is any better than say 20/48.

Agreed. In fact, it is well known that the lower four bits of even the best ADC converters used in the studios is dominated by thermal noise.

And I've not seen any DB tests that show even golden ears can distinguish between high bitrate DD+ and lossless.

Presumably neither Dolby or DTS would spend money on expensive R&D for something that is not distinguishable.

Gary

dialog_gvf

01-24-07, 03:12 PM

Well, until Paidgeek tells us who he is, I go by direct information I have from Sony on why they didn't want to use VC-1. They were absolutely dedicated to finishing a title in two days or else.

We are supposed to believe hearsay over the word of someone whom the mods of this forum are satisfied has supplied adequate credentials?

You said "us", not "me". I would fully accept you choosing to go by direct information.

Gary

b2bonez

01-24-07, 03:24 PM

Well, until Paidgeek tells us who he is, I go by direct information I have from Sony on why they didn't want to use VC-1. They were absolutely dedicated to finishing a title in two days or else.

Clearly the attitude has changed with their AVC encoder and glacial pace that it uses to encode. So maybe they are more open to VC-1 now that they know how bad things could be with AVC :).

Hmm... So again you claim to know more about Sony's business than an employee of Sony...?? How odd.. :rolleyes: Paidgeek has been vetted by the Mods here on AVS. Is that not good enough for you ??

b2b

b2bonez

01-24-07, 03:28 PM

There is no science to support that 24/48 is any better than say 20/48. And I've not seen any DB tests that show even golden ears can distinguish between high bitrate DD+ and lossless.

Having said this, I fully support increased bandwidth as I had speculated would happen a few months back in a PM to you, along with TL. From what CJ and other insiders have written, it is clear that bandwidth can be a limiting factor at times.

Why don't you just come out and say it.. MS says that DD+ is "good enough" because "we say so".. ;)

b2b

dialog_gvf

01-24-07, 03:33 PM

DVD Empire's HD Wars stats (http://www.dvdempire.com/index.asp?userid=99365270145295&tab_id=60&site_id=69&site_media_id=0)

BD is fast approaching 2x HD DVD sales for the past week count on DVD Empire.

HD DVD: 36.35%
Blu-ray: 63.65%

Gary

b2bonez

01-24-07, 03:35 PM

dialog_gvf

01-24-07, 03:38 PM

Wait until March when it's "Casino Royale" vs. the "The Jerk".. :)

"The Jerk" is April, isn't it?

Gary

b2bonez

01-24-07, 03:43 PM

"The Jerk" is April, isn't it?

Gary

Well I had to give them something exclusive for HD-DVD (a Universal title). The only other thing is "Hollywoodland" on Feb. 7.. ;)

b2b

orogogus

01-24-07, 03:57 PM

Less flexible, not more flexible. And we don't know if it's easier to implement (LG apparently couldn't do it, at least on the BH100). It's fair to say it's easier to create basic content on it (at least in advance of mature tool support), though not necessarily any easier than it is to use the comparable basic format, HDMV. Any claims beyond that are speculative at best.

Meh, prove it to me. So far it seems not to be the case. Proof being in the pudding. Show me something in BD-J that can't or hasn't already been done with HDi. Nothing speculative about that.

nataraj

01-24-07, 03:57 PM

Presumably neither Dolby or DTS would spend money on expensive R&D for something that is not distinguishable.

Are you suggesting that since Dolby & DTS spent money on lossless, it must be distinguishable ?

Then I don't think you have dealt much with high end audio ... where double blind tests are laughed at and snake oil rules.

scaesare

01-24-07, 03:58 PM

b2bonez

01-24-07, 04:00 PM

Are you suggesting that since Dolby & DTS spent money on lossless, it must be distinguishable ?

Then I don't think you have dealt much with high end audio ... where double blind tests are laughed at and snake oil rules.

Why don't you just come out and say it.. MS says that DD+ is "good enough" because "we say so".. ;)

b2b

paidgeek

01-24-07, 04:00 PM

Well, until Paidgeek tells us who he is, I go by direct information I have from Sony on why they didn't want to use VC-1. They were absolutely dedicated to finishing a title in two days or else.

Clearly the attitude has changed with their AVC encoder and glacial pace that it uses to encode. So maybe they are more open to VC-1 now that they know how bad things could be with AVC :).

Amir,

Please PM me or post here who specifically said our encodes had to happen in two days. This makes absolutely no sense since the time line for the rest of the project allows the time required for customizing the encodes as necessary. If the encode can be done in a week that has always been perfectly acceptable. Are you making this stuff up? I work here and I suspect I would of heard about any two day encode mandates...

BrynRhys

01-24-07, 04:07 PM

Amir,

Please PM me or post here who specifically said our encodes had to happen in two days. This makes absolutely no sense since the time line for the rest of the project allows the time required for customizing the encodes as necessary. If the encode can be done in a week that has always been perfectly acceptable. Are you making this stuff up? I work here and I suspect I would of heard about any two day encode mandates...

Gauntlet, let me introduce you to the floor.

dialog_gvf

01-24-07, 04:09 PM

Are you suggesting that since Dolby & DTS spent money on lossless, it must be distinguishable ?

I'm saying before developing and marketing lossless they would have had clear evidence that LPCM beat their lossy codecs.

Otherwise, why wouldn't they trumpet the equality of lossy, and the brilliance of the corporation to accomplish such a triumph versus merely reducing the bits needed to represent raw audio?

The former would be an IP triumph. The latter is a duh! for accomplishment. Microsoft has WMA lossless. I'm sure there are others.

Gary

bobgpsr

01-24-07, 04:29 PM

I'm saying before developing and marketing lossless they would have had clear evidence that LPCM beat their lossy codecs.No, I agree with nataraj on this one. Lossless with adequate bit depth (20 bits is enough for the initial A/D) is always the goal of audiophiles. As valid as any DBT may be there will always be the lingering doubt that a lossy codec is adding artifacts. Lossless will aways have a marketing advantage over lossy IMHO.

Plus being actually lossless is easy to prove with pure instrumentation and does not have to depend on actual human hearing.

skogan

01-24-07, 04:40 PM

It's only two or three posts up from the one you quoted. Do you always jump in without checking for the context of a quote you find ironic? .

No, not always.

But sometimes I do. And in this case it didn't need outside context because the statement itself was internally ironic. The end of the statement contradicted the beginning. And that's all I was getting at. But thank you for your concern. Here's a random icon for you: :eek:

b2bonez

01-24-07, 04:43 PM

No, I agree with nataraj on this one. Lossless with adequate bit depth (20 bits is enough for the initial A/D) is always the goal of audiophiles. As valid as any DBT may be there will always be the lingering doubt that a lossy codec is adding artifacts. Lossless will aways have a marketing advantage over lossy IMHO.

Plus being actually lossless is easy to prove with pure instrumentation and does not have to depend on actual human hearing.

It amazes me that despite all the learned discussion here on AVS, that still a mindset of complication and clever twiddling of bits is a sign of superior technology and great deeds. The simple fact is, the goal is to deliver uncompressed video and audio across a digital connection between a "source device" and a "receiver device" using the best connection available (currently HDMI).

For the video part a uncompressed option is not a viable solution as the storage and bandwidth are beyond current solutions. But for audio, Blu-Ray can deliver the pure and unadulterated LPCM source as a viable option, as the technology has sufficient bandwidth and storage capacity to support that use.

We then get into a rationalization of "this audio codec is as good as the source" and "that uses too much bandwidth" all all the hokum that a compromise offers.... But the "source is the source" and if you can put it on the disc without compromise, then all other solutions fall to the wayside, as nothing can be better than what it was created from...

b2b

robena

01-24-07, 04:49 PM

dialog_gvf

01-24-07, 04:52 PM

b2bonez

01-24-07, 04:59 PM

Sorry, sounds like you're agreeing with me. I agree that 20-bit lossless (LPCM, DTHD, or DTS-HD MA) is enough and should be our goal.

Nataraj is claiming DD+ lossy is enough.

Gary

Nat is claiming that a Big Mac combo meal will fill your belly as good as a Prime Rib dinner.. That's true. But there is a difference.. ;)

b2b

wco81

01-24-07, 05:07 PM

Universal players are a Trojan Horse for HD-DVD to leech off the greater studio support of Blu-Ray. It goes with their premise that the studios will all flip or go neutral. But once the accumulation of titles from greater studio support piles up in Blu-Ray's favor, they know HD-DVD will be in a bind in the marketplace.

They are racing time before that content advantage consolidates.

As for only needing 25 or 30 GB, the formats have been out less than a year, with Blu-Ray barely 6 months, if that. Do you really think even a couple of years from now, never mind 5-10 years, 25 and 30 GB will still be predominant?

How long did DVD-4 remain the dominant format before DVD-9 displaced it?

Myopia, people.

nataraj

01-24-07, 05:18 PM

I'm saying before developing and marketing lossless they would have had clear evidence that LPCM beat their lossy codecs.

You would be wrong. Industry has highlighted 96/24 with little evidence from any DBT. You definitely need to look at audiophile industry to understand what I'm saying - it is all about subjectivity. If you go to audioasylum.com and talk about dbt you will probably be banned.

BTW, as for as lossless when it concerns music, I've always beleived that is achievable only when you can sit in front of the musician and listen without any electronics in between. As a person who has done this often in the past, I can tell you that is the only real lossless.

Everything else is only perceptual lossless - including any kind of digital sampling.

bobgpsr

01-24-07, 05:29 PM

Sorry, sounds like you're agreeing with me. I agree that 20-bit lossless (LPCM, DTHD, or DTS-HD MA) is enough and should be our goal.

Nataraj is claiming DD+ lossy is enough.Hmmm, I guess that I am as a goal. But I will admit that the 1.5 Mbps DD+ on KK sounded "ok" for me. Plus it did 24 bit depth not the 16 bit that the Warner TrueHD has been using. So it is a tough trade for me for the current 16 bit allocations. It does seem that forthcoming 7.1 TrueHD or dts-HD MA tracks for 3 hour movies really could use the extra bandwidth and space of TL51 (if the 1.5x improvement is true).

nataraj

01-24-07, 05:29 PM

Nataraj is claiming DD+ lossy is enough.

Certainly not. I've not even heard DD+ let alone compare to lossless. I'm just saying that because industry is pushing lossless doesn't automatically mean there is a clearly identifying difference between lossy encode and lossless.

For all the lossless people I've a question. What do you guys think about audio watermarking ? Back in my audiophile days, this was the reason we didn't like DVD-A ...

darinp2

01-24-07, 05:30 PM

Good question. Any idea what the total size on-disc for that title was?

Talk's own calcs for the size of KK w/ TrueHD would have been was something like 34GB... and that inlcuded IME.

Do you really think a title that was only 70% the running length would have been THAT much more difficult to encode?I wouldn't expect the size to be the main issue, but bandwidth. Even a movie half the length of KK could have things left off because of bandwidth limitations.

--Darin

hellokeith

01-24-07, 05:39 PM

Certainly not. I've not even heard DD+ let alone compare to lossless. I'm just saying that because industry is pushing lossless doesn't automatically mean there is a clearly identifying difference between lossy encode and lossless.

And also, LPCM at 44/16 or 48/16 or 48/20 or 48/24 is not lossless if the master audio was 96/24 or 192/24. Just because it says LPCM, does not necessarily mean it is lossless. Same with Dolby TrueHD and DTS HD Master Audio, but I would suspect there is less of a chance of downconverting/dithering with Dolby TrueHD and DTS HD Master Audio tracks compared to LPCM tracks, since they are compressed and thus more space efficient.

dialog_gvf

01-24-07, 06:05 PM

b2bonez

01-24-07, 06:29 PM

Certainly not. I've not even heard DD+ let alone compare to lossless. I'm just saying that because industry is pushing lossless doesn't automatically mean there is a clearly identifying difference between lossy encode and lossless.

For all the lossless people I've a question. What do you guys think about audio watermarking ? Back in my audiophile days, this was the reason we didn't like DVD-A ...

Why don't you just come out and say it.. MS says that DD+ is "good enough" because "we say so"..

But if you really, really want lossless.. that's OK, because sometimes if we have the bandwidth we can do that too.. maybe.. sometimes.. possibly.. but DD+ is good enough, really, we promise.. :)

b2b

rto

01-24-07, 06:34 PM

You would be wrong. Industry has highlighted 96/24 with little evidence from any DBT. You definitely need to look at audiophile industry to understand what I'm saying - it is all about subjectivity. If you go to audioasylum.com and talk about dbt you will probably be banned.

BTW, as for as lossless when it concerns music, I've always beleived that is achievable only when you can sit in front of the musician and listen without any electronics in between. As a person who has done this often in the past, I can tell you that is the only real lossless.

Everything else is only perceptual lossless - including any kind of digital sampling.

Praise be! Claims regarding the superiority of various sampling rates and codecs are essentially meaningless without a body of empirical data as supporting evidence. When the CD standard was adopted, I was one of those dinosaurs who still preferred pristine, high quality recordings on vinyl ( surface noise be damned ), and I still prefer LPs to plain vanilla CDs.....but. I've always recognized that my subjective perceptions didn't necessarily have any basis in objective reality. LPs require a great deal of TLC, and analog playback equipment demands careful set-up and tweaking, so it's an entirely separate aesthetic from digital convenience.

I'm convinced that most of the claims thrown around here and elsewhere with
such casual abandon, are far more related to psychology, marketing, and planned obsolescence, than a noble quest for the holy grail of audio. In the absence of highly suggestive data, how can they represent anything else?

rto

01-24-07, 06:35 PM

Why don't you just come out and say it.. MS says that DD+ is "good enough" because "we say so"..

Can you offer proof that it isn't?

webphilosopher

01-24-07, 06:46 PM

Unfortunately, most of our ears are lossy rather than lossless.

b2bonez

01-24-07, 06:47 PM

Can you offer proof that it isn't?

Simple logic would tell you the "Orange" is better than a can of "Minute Maid". Do you have trouble with that premise ??

b2b

rto

01-24-07, 06:55 PM

Simple logic would tell you the "Orange" is better than a can of "Minute Maid". Do you have trouble with that premise ??

We're not talking about orange juice. In the absence of repeatable sensory/perceptual experimental protocols, with highly suggestive data-sets, any conclusions about the inherent superiority of "lossless" over a sophisticated compression codec, are by definition, completely unsupported by any meaningful scientific criteria........no matter how logical jumping to such conclusions may seem.

scaesare

01-24-07, 07:06 PM

I wouldn't expect the size to be the main issue, but bandwidth. Even a movie half the length of KK could have things left off because of bandwidth limitations.

--Darin

I've not seen MV, although I've heard it had a particularly "stylistic" look (grain?) to it.

What about it do you suppose would be so much different than KK or Batman Begins?

-sc

b2bonez

01-24-07, 07:14 PM

We're not talking about orange juice. In the absence of repeatable sensory/perceptual experimental protocols, with highly suggestive data-sets, any conclusions about the inherent superiority of "lossless" over a sophisticated compression codec, are by definition, completely unsupported by any meaningful scientific criteria........no matter how logical jumping to such conclusions may seem.

Hmm.. OK.. Enjoy your "Minute Maid". Seems you'd never notice the difference anyway... without a lab report... ;)

b2b

webphilosopher

01-24-07, 07:15 PM

rdjam

01-24-07, 07:17 PM

Well, I'm going to jump in here and make a point that some may not understand or like.

A 48/20 or 48/24 recording is only a representation of the original source and has already "lost" something and is therefore already different from the original source.

Further, if something is recorded at 96/24 and then compressed as a high bitrate DD+ stream, whose to say that it doesn't lose more of the original sound than a 48/24 uncompressed stream?

If you think about it, the 96/24 uncompressed source already has TWICE the information of the 48/24 uncompressed source. It's hardly realistic to think that a high bitrate DD+ compression will lose half the audio information.

So a high bitrate 96/24 DD+ audio stream is likely to be much closer to the original source than an uncompressed, or losslessly compressed, 48/24 audio stream.

I'm reasonably sure that those of us who are not pre-disposed to disagreement will understand exactly what I'm saying. Yes?

dialog_gvf

01-24-07, 07:20 PM

What adequate credentials do you think "PaindGeek" supplied to the Mods??

Amir, Corporate Vice President of Microsoft is stating his experience in the first hand. Amir is the highest level executive in charge of VC1 and this is his direct experience with Sony.

And I was comparing this information to contradictory information that was posted by someone who is involved day to day creating these titles at Sony.

Are you questioning paidgeek's credentials? I'm sure not questioning Amir's.

You sir have just dropped a few notches with me and I would hope with many others. You just joined the ranks of B2B and I am so glad you two are not on the side of HD DVD as if for nothing else I would likely jump ship.

I'm sorry you feel that way. It wasn't an attack on Amir, but on the reliability of the information he received.

Seems everyone wants to make this debate personal all of the sudden.

Gary

WayneL

01-24-07, 07:22 PM

rto belives in observable results while b2b is mermerized by specs. I bet b2b would just love 480/24

rto

01-24-07, 07:23 PM

Hmm.. OK.. Enjoy your "Minute Maid". Seems you'd never notice the difference anyway... without a lab report... ;)

b2b

Mkay. You go right on believing in the existence of Bigfoot, and alien abductions, if that floats your boat. ;)

darinp2

01-24-07, 07:28 PM

I've not seen MV, although I've heard it had a particularly "stylistic" look (grain?) to it.

What about it do you suppose would be so much different than KK or Batman Begins?I haven't watched the whole thing, but there are definitely some very grainy parts. That is one reason it could be difficult. I would expect KK to be one of the easier non-animations on a second-by-second basis (although it is long) partially because of how clean it is. When I saw the demo done in AVC for KK maybe 9 months ago I figured it would be one of the best looking releases (although at the time I didn't know if or when it would come out). Batman is one that looks good to me, but I wouldn't expect it to be the hardest either. Fairly recent and not the most grainy. I believe that one took a long time to encode as it was.

And we are talking about three 2.35:1 movies here, not even 1.85:1 or 1.78:1 movies that don't get the advantage of all that black space in the bars that should compress extremely easily.

As far as lossless audio, it was only something like 6 months ago that Amir was telling us how he pushed for lossless audio within the HD DVD group. Has the whole HD DVD camp now moved to pushing lossy audio over lossless audio, or just some? ;) That said, I can live fine with DD+, but I can see why one camp would start downplaying lossless audio. Maybe if HD DVD adds the 51GB discs and 1.5x spin rate they can go back to telling us how good lossless audio is and how much we should appreciate what they did to bring it to us.

--Darin

EatingPie

01-24-07, 07:30 PM

I wonder why - if Apple were really an active BDA member and the BD drive is as inexpensive as the HD DVD drive - AppleTV doesn't have a Blu-ray model for $499 - instead of just a media extender for $299 ...
Probably because Apple can make nearly that much for an iPod with much cheaper components. Apple's pricing (and thus likely the margins) have always been high on their hardware.

I do expect to see BD Super Drives on the Mac Pro pretty soon, though.

Good speculation. I'll add my two cents here.

The incredibly stupid, hobbled, and doomed to failure TV aka AppleTV :) maxes at 720p. That's a huge problem right there, since the HDTV trend is moving to 1080p, except for the low end. Why, oh why, put a Blu-Ray player in something that downrezzes it 100% of the time to 720p? I said hobbled for a reason! :)

Sorry to vent here, I'm super pissed -- and downright dumbfounded -- at Apple's short-sightedness with this product. Besides 720p, there's no firewire port, which would have made it an cinch to turn into an HD DVR -- heck, Apple even had rough Firewire-DVR software a year and a half ago. But noooooo....

I think there's a limit on the Stupid Scale, and a 1080p Blu-Ray drive in a 720p-only machine would have pushed AppleTV so far over the top, it would have taken the iPhone with it! :)

-Pie

b2bonez

01-24-07, 07:30 PM

...

kevinca1

01-24-07, 07:34 PM

Time Out. Quite a few have forgot theses rules.

Originally Posted by David Bott
MEMBER ABUSE IS NOT WELCOME
>>> NOTICE <<<

This area, as well as all areas of AVS Forum is for the discussion, support, and debate on various areas of the audio video world. This is not the place to attack others or to jump into a thread just to make for issues.

The area of high def media and media players is currently a very hot topic. If you can not conduct yourself in an adult manor, AVS FORUM IS NOT THE PLACE FOR YOU TO POST.

As you enter into either the HD DVD or Blu-ray areas, you are to post thoughtfully on those topics and not come in just to attack someone outright or just to disrupt a chat that is happening. IT IS NOT WELCOME.

Attacking someone will result in the suspension of your posting rights on the site without warning. So, think before you type. Read what you wrote. Think about it some more. Then press submit.

We will not let the attacks continue. Remember, making a post to attack some back is just as bad as making the attack. You are also in the wrong. (Evil begets evil.)

To debate is one thing, to attack is another. PLEASE THINK.

And a word from our gracious Mod..

Originally Posted by markrubin
Forum Rules: Read This Before You Post
Welcome to the AVS HDTV Forums:

special rules apply to posting here: please observe them:

-No bashing other members
-Please no fighting or trolling
-if you disagree with something posted: challenge the information; not the poster
-make sure your information is accurate; cite the facts on which you base your post: if it is your opinion, qualify it as such
-are you an industry insider? identify yourself as such and do not use AVS to bash your competition

AVS is a technical forum: we expect posters to maintain a high techical and ethical standard in your posts

AVS has Moderators who volunteer to enforce these rules: Moderators can edit or delete your post and even recommend the suspension of posters who continually violate AVS rules

If you see a post that violates rules or is spam, contains bashing, trolling, etc: please do not respond to it: use the 'report this post to a Moderator' button and let the mods handle it

Please keep the discussions civil and technical in nature

markrubin

01-25-07, 07:37 AM

reopened...for a while

Kosty

01-25-07, 07:49 AM

Asked on the insiders thread...

Originally Posted by Kosty
Gents:

Dances with Wolves is being released by Fox on BD SL 25GB with AVC and the length is being reduced from 236 minutes to 181 minutes,

Why wouldn't this be a perfect candidate for a DL 50GB disc? With branching ? Isn't this the perfect case to justify why DL50s are needed? AVS should have enough space with a 50GB disc to store the full length of it.

I would love to have this in its full version and have the ability to play the shorter cut as well. Seriously this is one of those epic films that I would love to see in true HD.

Any thoughts?

Kosty

01-25-07, 07:56 AM

These polls have been open for a while an they are about to close in a couple days

Please vote in you have a player in either format, no trolling mis-votes please, votes are public, multiple players allowed, can vote in both polls if you own both

for HD DVD owners, including Xbox 360 HD DVD drive owners
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=768075

for Blu-ray owners including PS3's used for Blu-ray playback
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=768087

thank you in advance for keeping these polls accurate please

What'sHD

01-25-07, 07:57 AM

Ben's comment that VC1 is the best of the 3 codecs at preserving grain struck me as something testable and verifiable.

If not objectively, at least in the opinion of movie-watchers here.

And this is not a format issue per se, so maybe some non-biased, thought-out responses?

scaesare

01-25-07, 09:32 AM

I haven't watched the whole thing, but there are definitely some very grainy parts. That is one reason it could be difficult. I would expect KK to be one of the easier non-animations on a second-by-second basis (although it is long) partially because of how clean it is. When I saw the demo done in AVC for KK maybe 9 months ago I figured it would be one of the best looking releases (although at the time I didn't know if or when it would come out). Batman is one that looks good to me, but I wouldn't expect it to be the hardest either. Fairly recent and not the most grainy. I believe that one took a long time to encode as it was.

And we are talking about three 2.35:1 movies here, not even 1.85:1 or 1.78:1 movies that don't get the advantage of all that black space in the bars that should compress extremely easily.

As far as lossless audio, it was only something like 6 months ago that Amir was telling us how he pushed for lossless audio within the HD DVD group. Has the whole HD DVD camp now moved to pushing lossy audio over lossless audio, or just some? ;) That said, I can live fine with DD+, but I can see why one camp would start downplaying lossless audio. Maybe if HD DVD adds the 51GB discs and 1.5x spin rate they can go back to telling us how good lossless audio is and how much we should appreciate what they did to bring it to us.

--Darin

Man, I'd love to see a histogram of all the individual track rates to see what the current mux allocation looks like as compared to actual usage. And to see where peaks align.