First off, I should say that I am format neutral and don't want to start a flame war. An interesting question that I would like to hear answered by with experience in both formats what their preference is, and why. If you don't own both, please refrain from posting.

I just recently picked up my HD DVD player and I think I am personally becoming partial to that format. I love the way they set up their menu system, and how they decided to do the commentaries I think is an awesome feature as well. It offers some actual functional difference in playback over Blu-ray, which now that I have used HD DVD seems to be another iteration of DVD, the only difference being improved quality.

They are the same. Pop in a neutral movie, Put a blanket over the players, and hide the case and I would have no idea which player was being used.

Oh great. Another useless thread in the dual-format forum that is out to pit the two HD formats against each other. And of course, it didn't take long before a couple of saps bit. :rolleyes:

I have an LG BH100, and the one I 'prefer' is BOTH. I simply don't care which HD format the film I want comes out on. As long as it comes out on at least one of them.

Well said. The previous two posters have once again proven that there are lies, dam* lies, and statistics. These arguments have nothing to do with sitting down and enjoying a movie.

Doug

To the OP, I enjoy my HD DVD movies more, as they generally look better, have more advanced menus and extras. Yes, Blu Ray looks better on paper , but not delivered. Sony jump the gun rushing out to compete with Toshiba. The BD releases on MPEG 2 just can't deliver compared to VC-1. They also seem to expect consumers to buy halve finished equipment. I also prefer the releases that I can only get on HD DVD. Yes, I have the best releases on Blu Ray so I have compared both.

HD DVD = 50, XA2
Blu Ray = 16, PS3

To the OP, I enjoy my HD DVD movies more, as they generally look better, have more advanced menus and extras. Yes, Blu Ray looks better on paper , but not delivered. Sony jump the gun rushing out to compete with Toshiba. The BD releases on MPEG 2 just can't deliver compared to VC-1. They also seem to expect consumers to buy halve finished equipment. I also prefer the releases that I can only get on HD DVD. Yes, I have the best releases on Blu Ray so I have compared both.

HD DVD = 50, XA2
Blu Ray = 16, PS3

I'd say your 'bias' isn't because of the actual PQ difference of HD and BD, as much as it's because you're watching your BD's on a PS3 (a bloody gaming console!).

Again, this is the dual-format PLAYER forum. So maybe if you (and others here) actually watched your discs on a 'single unit'. You would see that your bias has no merit.

I'm more of a BR fan, because that's what I own, but I'll probably get both eventually.

Arguing that HD-DVD is better because they have the top selling disk is ..... stupid.

Why?

Because the titles HD-DVD has aren't strong. When one of the few good titles comes out, that's where everyone's money goes. Fewer quality choices = more sales for the few that are quality choices.

Thanks for coming out. :)

we can go on all day, but I don't think anyone wants to read our crap as it has all been said back and forth a million times. Your rebuttal was weak (both times) and has more holes in it than swiss cheese. If you want to continue though, PM me and we can continue this "pointless" argument there.

Thanks,
Have a great weekend! :)

I'd say your 'bias' isn't because of the actual PQ difference of HD and BD, as much as it's because you're watching your BD's on a PS3 (a bloody gaming console!).

Again, this is the dual-format PLAYER forum. So maybe if you (and others here) actually watched your discs on a 'single unit'. You would see that your bias has no merit.

Well I guess BD is in trouble as the PS3 is considered the Blu Ray player to buy if you don't want a obsolete paper weight! I don't think the OP said anything about a single unit! :mad: If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen! :D Yes there is a PQ difference, get your system calibrated.

Well I guess BD is in trouble as the PS3 is considered the Blu Ray player to buy if you don't want a obsolete paper weight! I don't think the OP said anything about a single unit! :mad: If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen! :D Yes there is a PQ difference, get your system calibrated.

My system is calibrated just fine. And I haven't seen a player review yet that has stated that the PS-3 has equal or better PQ than ANY of the stand-alone BD players. As far as PQ between HD and BD goes, I've found that it's far more title dependent, than it is format dependent. Furthermore, since you obviously can't read, I didn't say anything about the OP saying anything about a single unit. I did bring up the fact that this is the "Dual Format Player" forum, and not the "People who have two players so they can play both formats" forum. :rolleyes:

Watcher, please scoot to a thread that actually applies to you.

As for my preference, I started with the HD-A1, and I still love it, despite it's molasses speed. I'm also an avid lover of the underdog,which also contributes to the support I give to HD. The Matrix set is a fine piece of work as well.

Having said that, the Pirates BDs (specifically Dead Man's Chest) show that the higher bitrate and storage ability of BD CAN make a difference, for studios like Disney and Sony that actually take advantage of those abilities. I can get dual-format releases I want on BD for $7-10 cheaper than I can their HD combo counterpart, and the difference on loading times between my PS3 and my HD-A1 is astronomical, all signs that point to my BD collection catching up with my HD collection at some point this year.

Both formats still have their flaws - HD should have taken a more aggressive approach with disc size and bitrate abilities, while BD should have taken a big note from HD and had their software solution be one that was all-encompassing and mandatory from the start and not some half-baked incremental solution.

Universal provides mostly dual-layer quality titles at $19.99-24.99 (at most retailers) with generous extras (on most), Fox provides mostly single-layer quality titles for $34.99 (at most retailers) and next to no extras. Warner BDs I can get for about $27 B&M on day and date titles, whereas they want me to pay $34.99
B&M for the same title on HD Combo.

There are pros and cons to both, but I'm starting to lean more towards Blu in regards to total technical quality. This is not to say I am abandoning HD though (I may be the only one, but I am genuinely hyped to have Darkman in HD with lossless audio).

Watcher, please scoot to a thread that actually applies to you.
If only one side is being shared, I will share the other.

This applies to me.

I enjoy both i first decided i would have nothing to do with sony but after buying a ps3 and some br movies i have changed my mind. The thing i hate most is the pr campaign for sony whether it be"we have already won" or the bb employees spinning the truth it is all fud but when it comes to movie watching i enjoy both. I prefer to buy an hd dvd movie if it comes out in both formats because of the extras such as ime and the true hd lossless audio (even though pcm sounds amazing too) that and i am a longtime toshiba fan(I still use my sd-9200 as my dvd-audio player.

Let me reiterate the beginning of this thread's title, which is "For those who own both formats".

I also don't understand the raising of noses towards using the PS3 as a primary BD player.

Let me reiterate the beginning of this thread's title, which is "For those who own both formats".

I also don't understand the raising of noses towards using the PS3 as a primary BD player.

I wasn't raising my nose towards anyone using a PS3 as BD player. I was raising my nose at someone using a PS3 to judge BD's picture quality compared to HD-DVD. Oh, and I was also raising my nose at this entire thread in that it's simply in the wrong forum.

Blah, Blah, Blah...video bitrate...Blah, Blah, Blah...lossless audio...

The winner goes to HD DVD...I don't have to wait on the stupid menu like Blu-ray.

And I do own both. For what its worth...I own 2:1 HD DVDs to Blu-Ray Discs (80 to 40)...but I never got a call from Nielsen Videoscan.

HD DVD has always been about whats available now, and reality. BD has always been about "whats coming" and hope. PS3, FOX titles, studio support equaling more tittles, bla bla bla. When it comes to BD ill believe it when I see it.

Buying into BD was the worst investment I made in my HT since I started this hobby 10 years ago. HD DVD has been the best.

I own 80 HD DVDs and 19 BDs.

I prefer HD DVD. When there's a choice, that's what I buy. I'd like to get some exclusive BD ... but FOX and Disney aren't releasing anything that I want.

But I do love my Panasonic BDP10 ... I just don't have much to play on it. Probably shouldn't have purchased it when I did. But I really wanted "Eight Below".

My HD-XA2 is just great. After some early confusion about mating it with my IN76, it's now working just fine. Reliable ... no glitches at all.

So both players are very fine. There's just no BD software that I want.

And isn't that ironic. All that fabulous studio support for BD ... yet nothing to buy ... nothing that I want anyway.

Edit: I have 19 HD DVDs and 3 BD

Oh, and I was also raising my nose at this entire thread in that it's simply in the wrong forum.

I know where you're coming from, but the places for people who love both formats to have civil discussion on AVS Forum are becoming few and far between.

For what it's worth, the menus on the Pirates BDs are a lot quicker to load than my HD-A1 is to load (and also the HD-A2, based on when I demoed one). I still love 'em both, though. Children of Men is on its way from DDD, Hellboy will be mine Tuesday - ahh, it's good to be neutral.

I like both formats. I think that the picture is slightly better for HD and the extra abilities are much better so far. I like the sound better on many Blu-Ray disks. I would love to see a dual player at a low price. I thought that the competion was bad but it has lowered the cost of both players. I am hoping that Samsung knocks the ball out of the park with their new dual player.

I first got the HD-A1, and love it. I then got the PS3 for "insurance". However, I still prefer HD DVD. If a movie is released in both, I will buy the HD DVD. The features are much better, and the PQ is usually a bit better. HD DVD has so many "must-haves" for me, but POTC 1 and 2 were probably the only BD movies I rushed out to get.

BTW, I own about 18 HD DVDs and 5 BD movies.

I was leaning towards HD DVD but the 10180p 24 support has me rethinking this. I don't have a disc on both formats to compare but I really enjoy the 1080p24 support the PS3 brings to the table. Casino Royale or Apocalypto in 1080p24 looks awesome. Likewise I have HD DVD's on an A2 that look fabulous as well. This is display independent on either an RS-1 or a 60 XBR2.

Not another thread war! :D

I was leaning towards HD DVD but the 10180p 24 support has me rethinking this. I don't have a disc on both formats to compare but I really enjoy the 1080p24 support the PS3 brings to the table. Casino Royale or Apocalypto in 1080p24 looks awesome. Likewise I have HD DVD's on an A2 that look fabulous as well. This is display independent on either an RS-1 or a 60 XBR2.
1080p/24 is great. The Toshiba HD-XA2 is suppose to be getting a firmware upgrade this summer to support it.

HD DVD

I'm impressed with the pq of the ps3 with the 1080p/24 update feed to my 940hd. I would hope for similar pq-once toshiba does the firmware update on the X2A.

HD DVD

+1

I prefer my PS3 as a player over my A2, because the PS3 does absolutely perfect 24p and operates a lot smoother.

Why would any film fan be biased other than the performance of the players?

+1

+ 2 :D

i honestly dont prefer any side i love them both and it would be very hard to pick a side. i like hd-dvd cause of cheaper stand alone price, but i like blu ray due to specs.

Display-wise, they are the same. The biggest difference I've noticed is audio quality. HD-DVDs typically have MUCH better audio formats than BDs. IMO though, BD would be my preference if the audio support matched HD-DVD...

PS3 and 360 hd dvd. Luv em both. Great values.

I buy hd dvd when possible mainly because it's the only format with backwards software compatible to dvd.

This could be very important down the line when trying to get marketshare from sd dvd, after all the early adopters have bought in already. More hd content availability to use on our expensive equipment, that's what we need.

Still either format will get the job done nicely and they have minor differences, really.

PS3 and 360 hd dvd. Luv em both. Great values.

I buy hd dvd when possible mainly because it's the only format with backwards software compatible to dvd.

This could be very important down the line when trying to get marketshare from sd dvd, after all the early adopters have bought in already. More hd content availability to use on our expensive equipment, that's what we need.

Still either format will get the job done nicely and they have minor differences, really.
Yeah this is my combo also
Right now I like HD DVD better as I find less compression interferenece, BD seems to have some slight artifacing and pixelation. Though both are great, I mostly collect music DVDS. I just got Eagles Farewell Tour HD DVD, and Black Crowes Freak and Roll Show BD both great.

Is there a player that has both formats?

My wife wants me to make sure that whatever movie she buys or rents can be watched, and she has no patience for the format wars, and my preference is to buy a single player that can play both formats as it can be a while before either side folds....

Is there a player that has both formats?

My wife wants me to make sure that whatever movie she buys or rents can be watched, and she has no patience for the format wars, and my preference is to buy a single player that can play both formats as it can be a while before either side folds....

Yes. The LG BH100. I have one, and I'm very happy with it. I believe Samsung has one that's about to come out as well.

And I haven't seen a player review yet that has stated that the PS-3 has equal or better PQ than ANY of the stand-alone BD players.

http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/cgi-bin/shootout.cgi?function=search&articles=133#SonyPlayStation%203%20(HDMI)

Relevant section:
The PS3 represents one of the best BD players I’ve used to date. It is fast, the image quality is excellent, and it supports more of the BD functions and features than just about any other player. The fact that it does this for nearly half the price of the other BD players out there is almost embarrassing, and rather disappointing when you think about it. As a standard DVD player, however, the PS3 may represent one of the worst progressive scan players I have ever tested. Surprising, considering its BD performance.

With the latest software upgrade, it is probably only a bit behind the Samsung in core performance areas, and ahead in a few others (audio) when using HDMI.

With a few notable exceptions for early BD titles, I would agree that the formats are close enough that how a movie is shot and intended to look will more than likely determine people's perceptions. Lots of long, deep focus material that really shows off an HD set will more often than not trump a movie that has lots of close-ups. More telling, though, is that my wife has formulated her opinion that Blu Rays are the ones without special features and HD-DVDs are the ones with. I'm not necessarily that much into most special features, but she is, and it's what she tells her/our friends, where I usually tell people to sit it out until Christmas when you can get a dual-format player that works for both standards.

Bill

HD DVD because it is a better value, has more features, and has better pricing on hardware.

The only advantage Blu-Ray has is more studio support but hopefully that will change.

Yes, I do own both.

I own the Pioneer HD1 and the Toshiba XA2, equally impressive in PQ and AQ. In SW, the nod goes to BD.

Display-wise, they are the same. The biggest difference I've noticed is audio quality. HD-DVDs typically have MUCH better audio formats than BDs. IMO though, BD would be my preference if the audio support matched HD-DVD...

Did you just come out from under a rock? Blu-ray discs in general use uncompressed LPCM 5.1 audio. Only Warner has really stiffed Blu-ray in the audio dept, and even then it's on a handful of titles. The titles containing DD+ are generally considered to sound exactly the same as the DD tracks on the BD side.

Also, Fox uses DTSHDMA on all their discs, something that hasn't even appeared on an HDDVD yet. If you are into lossless audio, Blu-ray has by far been the most consistant format in that regard, just not when WB is factored in, However even they have FINALLY found it in their hearts to start putting TrueHD on the discs, IE..300, Letters from IWO etc.

^Which players support DTS HD MA?

@TS (Topic Starter): maybe start a poll on this (I lost count)?

Thanks!

^Which players support DTS HD MA?

A bdps300 coupled with an Onkyo 605.

rutgar: You are right, this is the wrong forum and half of these threads of late are just to start bitching again between the two formats. I just want HD, period..... and wish the powers on both side of the table would agree on bringing this to the masses.. Problem is Toshiba and Microsoft won't cave nither will Sony.. And as far as the poster bringing up VC-1 codec, both formats are using it now.... and Microsoft owns it, ah go figure.

The titles containing DD+ are generally considered to sound exactly the same as the DD tracks on the BD side.

Also, Fox uses DTSHDMA on all their discs, something that hasn't even appeared on an HDDVD yet..

1. BS. 1.5mps DD+ (HD DVD) is just plain better than 640kbps DD found in BD.

2. Problem is no player today decodes DTS HD MA. HD DVD uses TruHD, hence no need for DTS MA. How many BD movies with TruHD?

As for LPCM 5.1 - Unless you have an hdmi receiver with the PS3 you cannot listen to LPCP....so you're stuck with plain DD - which again is worse than the worst audio on any HD DVD movie! I am curious what % of PS3 owners are running their set up through an hdmi receiver. At least we know that over 80% of all BD players are PS3....

just to set the record straight :rolleyes:

I honestly have no preference at all, whatever format either movie is on is fine with me.

My wife wanted to surprise me with a High Def DVD player for fathers day. She did not know anything about HD-DVD or Blu-Ray. She has always heard me talk so highly about the knowledge at "AVS Forum", so she did a google search, found the forum, and thought you guys could help her make an informed choice.

Unfortunately, threads like THIS ONE is what she found, full of grown men acting like an ass. Typing things here they would NEVER have the guts to say to another persons face. Nobody saying, "Well, in my *OPINION*.....", but rather typing that everyone else is an idiot because they don't agree with THEM. All the posts about "Oh God, not another tread about THIS". Well, if you don't want to read another thread about comparing formats, then MAYBE you should not click on the thread titled "For those who own both formats, which do you prefer?"!!! AVS Forum is a resource for the casual AV buyer also, not just those of us who come here every single day and read EVERY THREAD.

The original posters question is a valid one. If you own both, which do you prefer? The guys who answered saying that when both formats are available, they choose HD-DVD because that format offers more "extras" were a big help. Those who pointed out that Blu-Ray does offer more storage space are sharing good info to those who don't know that yet. Thanks to you guys. The "did you just climb out from under a rock" comments are just unbelievable from adults.

Oh, and no, I still don't have a freaking player. She gave up trying to find reliable info here.

All the posts about "Oh God, not another tread about THIS". Well, if you don't want to read another thread about comparing formats, then MAYBE you should not click on the thread titled "For those who own both formats, which do you prefer?"!!! AVS Forum is a resource for the casual AV buyer also, not just those of us who come here every single day and read EVERY THREAD.

Oh, and no, I still don't have a freaking player. She gave up trying to find reliable info here.
I now what you mean. Anywho, I've owned both and would choose Bluray if I had a choice of equally priced players. I prefer Bluray because of the additional bitrate & storage. I was biased to HD-DVD prior to seeing a BD player "in my home." The displays at the stores are not ideal setups. Too many lights, and the display setting are always cranked to the max. Not good for the PQ in a HT. I know I have said anti-bd statements as far as their pricing. But the more BD movies I watch, I see how far ahead of it's time Blu-ray is. It's like I just got finish watching POTC: Dead Man's Chest. The best PQ and AQ of any disc on any format that I've seen!(Before it was King Kong) You can check out my DVDspot profile in my signature to see my latest movie viewings. Well I own both formats at the moment, but my favor is swaying further into the blue everyday. Oh and the PCM tracks sound wonderful, no matter how much disc space they take up. Should sound even better once I take shipment of my Yamaha V661.

PS- I say "I've owned" both, because I recently sold off my XA1 to buy a BD player.

Oh, and no, I still don't have a freaking player. She gave up trying to find reliable info here.

Tell her to read this:

Get him a HD DVD player!

The reasons are easy:

- you get a better and bigger selection of movies (you can check this by yourself)

- you get a more advanced, fully operational format (not a work in progress with a lot of question marks about the future)

- you get the highest video and audio quality

- you get mostly cheaper media (unfortunately the combos are expensive)

- you support the underdog and not the cartell that thinks viral marketing is a good way to treat customers

- you get a "no bullsh*t" format

So in my eyes the choice is easy: go HD DVD. There is only one choice that would be better: get both! But even having both formats in my home theater I stick 90% to HD DVDs. The Bluray exclusive movies just aren't that good, there are only very few worth buying and the region code of Bluray is a PITA.

Yes. The LG BH100. I have one, and I'm very happy with it. I believe Samsung has one that's about to come out as well.

How much did you drop for that?

Blu-Ray!!!!!

Tell her to read this:

Get him a HD DVD player!

The reasons are easy:

- you get a better and bigger selection of movies (you can check this by yourself)

- you get a more advanced, fully operational format (not a work in progress with a lot of question marks about the future)

- you get the highest video and audio quality

- you get mostly cheaper media (unfortunately the combos are expensive)

- you support the underdog and not the cartell that thinks viral marketing is a good way to treat customers

- you get a "no bullsh*t" format

So in my eyes the choice is easy: go HD DVD. There is only one choice that would be better: get both! But even having both formats in my home theater I stick 90% to HD DVDs. The Bluray exclusive movies just aren't that good, there are only very few worth buying and the region code of Bluray is a PITA.

lol... Are you serious?

Blu-Ray has already won the battle. Game Over

How much did you drop for that?

I paid a dollar per line of resolution.



$1080.00 ;)

And with the convenience and peace of mind I now have... it was worth every penny. Besides, I paid close to that much for my standard DVD player just a couple of years ago (Pioneer Elite DV-47A).

i think hd-dvd is definitely the more complete format right now. if you count just the raw properties of the format (specs, studio support, hardware capabilities, etc), blu-ray is without a doubt the superior format. but if you count the implementation in the consideration (quality of available movies, whether discs use features availabile, level of functionality in the player, performance of players, cost), i think hd-dvd takes the ticket for now.

while it is indeed technically inferior to blu-ray, hd-dvd has been much, much, much more consistent. when you buy an hd-dvd, you know you're getting vc-1 video and dd+ audio. right off the bat, you're guaranteed next-gen codecs. that establishes a baseline minimum of quality right there. do some hd-dvds suck? yes. full metal jacket looks like ass. but that's a rarity. now, you might get a 30 gb disc or you might get a 15 gb disc. it might be encoded at 24 mbps or 16 mbps average. you might get the option of dolby true hd or you might not. but you always know, at the very least, you get vc-1 and dd+ at 1.5 mbps filling 15 gb.

now, let it be said that blu-ray using vc-1 or avc looks phenomenal, and that when you get your blu-ray, you'll probably have uncompressed 5.1 pcm or better, often dolby digital plus, true hd or dts hd/hd-master is included. that's true. but you also might be getting mpeg 2 and standard dolby digital. you might get that crammed onto a 25 gb disc and it'll look similar to broadcast hd. you might get it on a 50gb disc and it'll look virtually uncompressed. you never know. you might get java or you might not. your player might be able to make heads or tails of java, or it might not.

we've typically seen that where something is made available both on hd-dvd and blu-ray, they are either bit-for-bit identical (same size, codecs), or the hd-dvd is superior either because of better codecs (m:i III) or the presence of java-based special features not available on blu ray.

now, let me say that i fully expect hd-dvd to tank ultimately, probably in the next 18 months. but for now, blu-ray as a format has not been as comprehensively successfully implemented as hd-dvd. there's a world of potential for quality sound and audio -- and more often than not, it's realized, by some standard or another -- but right now, there's a very wide variation in quality. is it 25 or 50 gb? is it vc-1, avc or mpeg2? is it dts-hd? dts-hd master? dolby digital +? dolby true hd? 24/96 lpcm? 16/48 lpcm? straight-up dolby digital? there's a really high ceiling and a really low bottom, and the releases available run the gamut. in two years, when all this is sorted out and everybody is using either avc or vc-1 and either dts-master or dd true hd on each release, that won't be the case.

on the other hand, you do have the inherent limitations to the hd-dvd spec. in the event that a transfer uses the same codecs and is available on each format, and takes advantage of all the space available on each format, it should be better on blu-ray every time. add to that the fact that it seems that blu-ray players are in general of higher quality than toshiba's offerings (this includes the ps3), at least in terms of feature set and responsiveness, then yeah, it should be better to buy the blu-ray in that situation, especially since it seems that blu-ray is becoming more widely avaiable and less expensive. but that hasn't been the trend. so far, when titles have been made available on both formats, it has tended to be the case that either the hd-dvd is of superior quality due to better audio/video codecs (be it vc-1 versus mpeg 2 or dolby digital versus dolby true hd) or the hd-dvd has some special features (usually in-movie experience or something along those lines) not available on the blu-ray version. otherwise, they're typically bit-for-bit identical.

I prefer whatever movie I'm in the mood for... :D

I prefer whatever movie I'm in the mood for... :D

Agreed. But my movie selection will be partially based on the audio and video quality of the disc currently prejudiced by the available audio formats supported by the player. At the moment, everything else being equal, I'd pick a disc with uncompressed PCM, followed by DTS HD MA or HR soundtrack (I can only take advantage of the core DTS for now), then TrueHD (though I can't currently use the 5.1 TrueHD for now), then 1.5M DTS, then lowly DD+/DD. And everything else being equal, I'll pick the Blu-Ray disc over the "equivalent" HD-DVD disc simply because I believe Blu-ray is in a much better position to survive long term than HD-DVD because of the superior specs.

lol... Are you serious?

Blu-Ray has already won the battle. Game Over

He, he, you are a funny guy. Making jokes... :)

You are making fun, aren't you? Because otherwise I would have to question if you are still in your mind. You are, are you?

And you are format neutral, are you? Because this is the format neutral thread and I cannot imagine anyone being format neutral to vote for bluray. HD DVD is just so much better when it comes to movies.

BTW: I am format neutral (are you, too?), so just for the record:

http://img391.imageshack.us/img391/8603/neutralcm0.jpg

Certainly, I usually hide the PS3 behind a couch - it is just too ugly. Too much of a primitive wannabe chique it tries to have.

But I did enjoy Casino Royale; I just watched it for the second time.

They are the same. Pop in a neutral movie, Put a blanket over the players, and hide the case and I would have no idea which player was being used.

Sums it up for me. I have and thoroughly enjoy BOTH.
I wouldn't put a few franklins in my way that's for sure.

Then I would jut flip a coin... :D

So to conclude.

HD-DVD it is.

Ditto, Hd-dvd.

I liked your post, Gonk. :)

1. BS. 1.5mps DD+ (HD DVD) is just plain better than 640kbps DD found in BD.
On paper it atleast sounds better. ;)


2. Problem is no player today decodes DTS HD MA. HD DVD uses TruHD, hence no need for DTS MA. How many BD movies with TruHD?
Well, this will not always be so. Receivers are showing up with HDMI 1.3 & Decoding capabilities, next will be the players with streaming ability, in due time my fren. HDDVD uses TrueHD in such scarcity it is as rare as the pink stone in blood diamond. Much to do is made when a title has TrueHD on HDDVD yet MOST titles on BD (excluding HDDVD catered BD's I.E, WB titles) Have Uncompressed audio. I'm all for TrueHD or whatever lossless codec gets used, just use it already and make it the rule rather than the exception.


As for LPCM 5.1 - Unless you have an hdmi receiver with the PS3 you cannot listen to LPCP....so you're stuck with plain DD - which again is worse than the worst audio on any HD DVD movie!
Many titles on HDDVD have 640kbps DD+, which is identical to 640kbps DD. Mainly Universal uses the 1.5mbps DD+ so whats your point? In contrast Exclusive BD studios (exluding Lionsgate) ALL USE LOSSLESS AUDIO on every title.


I am curious what % of PS3 owners are running their set up through an hdmi receiver. At least we know that over 80% of all BD players are PS3....


The only percentage of people using HDMI on a ps3, or analog outs on a standalone player I give a crap about is myself. Who cares what everyone else is doing? How many a2/a20 owners have HDMI receivers :confused: :rolleyes:
who cares, as long as you do...right?
just to set the record straight :rolleyes:
You've done nothing but prove your ability to spin things

started of firmly with HD-DVD, but as time has gone on the more i choose blu ray as my format of choice.
I have 2 HD-DVD players and 2 BD players. the BD players are much better machines as far as freezing/glitches go. Im on my second XE1, as the first one had to be replaced. My A1 is a fussy little git and im just about done with it.

PS3 is my player of choice due to how quick it is, My panasonic does deliver a fine picture though (as does my replaced XE1).

each to there own but slowly im buying less and less HD-DVD. the Matrix was my last buy. I also think the latest AVC encodes are a tad better than the best VC-1 but that is strictly my opinion.

Display is a JVC HD1@110ins. full HD

I suppose im just losing confidence in HD-DVD.

I have owned both formats since they each were first released. I have had the HD-A1, HD-XA2 and most recently I have the HD-A2. I own a Ps3 for Blu-Ray. Out of all these machines the Ps3 has been 100% reliable and is the fastest to load and skip chapters in comparison..However the player is not the main reason for my choice since they will get better as time goes on for both sides and they have..

However I wholeheartedly prefer Blu-Ray simply because of Buena Vista's (Disney's) encoding team and their abilities to make movie's above and beyond HD-DVD's picture and sound quality.. Pretty much HD-DVD gives a good HD quality image and in some cases like in King Kong, at the expense of lower quality audio due to space and bandwidth constraints. It is clear the future of optical media is Blu-Ray and not HD-DVD... If you want to do a comparison between the best of both formats. Buy King Kong or The Matrix Revolutions and compare it to POTC: DMC, Apocalypto, or Bridge to Terabithia..All three of those Buena Vista pictures I mention were done by the same encoding team at Disney and are marvelous. There is a very noticeable difference in quality on 50 inch HDTV's and above...

Pretty much HD-DVD gives a good HD quality image and in some cases like in King Kong, at the expense of lower quality audio due to space and bandwidth constraints.


by the way what kind of setup are you running on the audio side? and vide? any pictures of your setup? even old ones I just want to see what your working with. :)

In order to say something is better then something else well you obviously need something good to bring out the best out of each category.

If you want to do a comparison between the best of both formats. Buy King Kong or The Matrix Revolutions and compare it to POTC: DMC, Apocalypto, or Bridge to Terabithia..All three of those Buena Vista pictures I mention were done by the same encoding team at Disney and are marvelous. There is a very noticeable difference in quality on 50 inch HDTV's and above...


Oh I have.... and IMO matrix looks better then DMC so does KING KONG. Bridge to terabithia isnt even in any of their leagues..

BTW since I am the one asking for pix heres pix of my setup and a list

sony xbr1 60"
denon 2807
krell 3250 (sold it recently but I havent watched any movies since)
definitive technology 7001 towers
definitive technolog clr 3000
HD A2 HD DVD player
ps3

room treatment in the first reflection points and it has been rta to as close as flat as possible. (this graph is the only one I could find before room treatment and more tweaking)

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a23/subingncali/5427d9da.jpg

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a23/subingncali/0427071206aaaSmall.jpg

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a23/subingncali/ScreenHunter_050.jpg

Oh I have.... and IMO matrix looks better then DMC so does KING KONG. Bridge to terabithia isnt even in any of their leagues..


The matrix films look great, so does King kong, but there isnt anyway I could say with a straight face they look better than POTC 1 or 2, or Bridge to Terabithia. Bridge blew me out of the water, it is one of the best HD presentations I have seen to date, up there with all the rest of the greats that mostly happen to be AVC, & Or Disney.

The matrix films look great, so does King kong, but there isnt anyway I could say with a straight face they look better than POTC 1 or 2, or Bridge to Terabithia. Bridge blew me out of the water, it is one of the best HD presentations I have seen to date, up there with all the rest of the greats that mostly happen to be AVC, & Or Disney.
what kind of display are you using? isf calibrated?

I actually watched both pirates dead man chest and hustle and flow and all the matrix recently on both my 60" display and on a 100 or so inch steward screen with a sony pearl projector isf calibrated. IMO their is a tad difference but NOTHING blows matrix,pirates out of the water.. thats a bold statement man and saying that kind of like saying theirs a night and day difference...

No preference. I love them both ; )

As for LPCM 5.1 - Unless you have an hdmi receiver with the PS3 you cannot listen to LPCP....so you're stuck with plain DD - which again is worse than the worst audio on any HD DVD movie! I am curious what % of PS3 owners are running their set up through an hdmi receiver. At least we know that over 80% of all BD players are PS3....


It is even worse. Sometimes there comes no DD with the PCM track. Like the original languange track of the Kung Fu Hustle bluray. And then we PS3 users without a HDMI receiver (and my guesstimate would be that 90% of the PS3 user do not have a HDMI receiver) get only 2.0 sound. 2.0! Stereo! Crap. Thats a HUGE flaw of the PS3.

HD DVD players are leagues better, they can convert the lossless tracks to DTS or DD and you get at least 5.1 multi-channel.

Bluray is just a lot of talk, on paper advantages, smoke and mirrors. In reality HD DVD is the better format.

I prefer BD over HD DVD.
1 BD is way more durable that HD DVD I rent from netflixs and about 1 out of 4 or so HD DVD's don't play to the end they get stuck and I end up watching the rest of the movie on the stadard def side if that is an option. I have not yet to get a BD that was not in perfect working order and rarely do they scratch.
2. I can get lossless sound from my PS3.

It is even worse. Sometimes there comes no DD with the PCM track. Like the original languange track of the Kung Fu Hustle bluray. And then we PS3 users without a HDMI receiver (and my guesstimate would be that 90% of the PS3 user do not have a HDMI receiver) get only 2.0 sound. 2.0! Stereo! Crap. Thats a HUGE flaw of the PS3.

HD DVD players are leagues better, they can convert the lossless tracks to DTS or DD and you get at least 5.1 multi-channel.

Bluray is just a lot of talk, on paper advantages, smoke and mirrors. In reality HD DVD is the better format.

Change your audio to bitstream optical or get a HDMI reciever either way you will get 5.1 sound on a PS3.

Either but however, they have movies I like more in Blu-Ray than HD though!

To me it´s probably HD-DVD so far. I love those catalog titles from universal. Plus the True HD soundtracks on some of the warner titles is nice too ;)
And since I got my XE1 player I havn´t got ANY problems with lock-ups etc.

The thing I´m looking forward to most on BD though is the horror classics from Anchor Bay coming in october.

I´m really glad I own both formats :)

I've always thought that the PQ of HD-DVD outshines BluRay. Reading reviews of most titles, I'm not alone either...most profeesional reviews seem to indicate the same (some titles are equal). Anyone here can correct me if I am wrong but I've never seen a BluRay movie rated higher than the same title on HD-DVD; some are the same but the rest (as far as I have seen) are lower rated for PQ.

I'm neutral because I want all titles but - if all titles were on both formats, I'd choose HD-DVD due to the consistently better PQ - that's primarily what we're after, right?

As far as audio goes - I'm no audiophile. The title I've personally been most impressed with was 'The Guardian' on BR.

I've always thought that the PQ of HD-DVD outshines BluRay. Reading reviews of most titles, I'm not alone either...most profeesional reviews seem to indicate the same (some titles are equal). Anyone here can correct me if I am wrong but I've never seen a BluRay movie rated higher than the same title on HD-DVD; some are the same but the rest (as far as I have seen) are lower rated for PQ.

I'm neutral because I want all titles but - if all titles were on both formats, I'd choose HD-DVD due to the consistently better PQ - that's primarily what we're after, right?

As far as audio goes - I'm no audiophile. The title I've personally been most impressed with was 'The Guardian' on BR.

You should watch Pirates of the Caribean part 2, they have the best picture quality on either format

You should watch Pirates of the Caribean part 2, they have the best picture quality on either format
I've seen POTC2 on Blu-ray. I still think King Kong is slightly better. The detail on KK is outstanding.

You should watch Pirates of the Caribean part 2, they have the best picture quality on either format

I own it. It was better than most. It's been several weeks since I watched it but I don't recall thinking it was the best PQ of either format. I don't think it was superior to the Matrix or The Flags or Our Fathers....or The Hulk (horrible movie though) on HD-DVD or Flyboys on BR. Those are some of the best movies I've seen (PQ wise) on either format. There might be better ones but that is what comes immediately to mind.

These are only my opinions, and maybe different setups have diiferent results but here's mine:
I have an XA2 (latest firmware) and a PS3 (latest firmware) playing via a Pioneer Elite PRO-FHD1 (ISF calibrated). On my setup, BR's don't look quite up to par with HD-DVD. With BR, there's typically alot of artifacting and graininess that I don't enjoy seeing after spending $500+ on a player. If I wanted grain, I'd watch the DVD version and be $1k richer. Some HD-DVD's have grain but not near as many titles are quite as affected as it's BR counterpart.

Again, just my opinion on my setup.

I have the A1 and a PS3. I prefer the HD DVD. My A1 through the Analog Audio 6Ch sounds much more superior than my PS3.
I still think the HD DVD discs released are more consistent in terms of PQ. They both, however, are very similar in PQ overall.

I have an A1 and a Samsung 1200. They both have their good points, and both can look very good. Overall, I prefer HD DVD, it seems to me to be a more finished and polished product. I also prefer the movie selection on HD DVD. I will say, that I think the Sammy is a little better at upscaling DVDs-slightly more detailed, and the A1 has better sound-warmer, fuller and richer.
J
Edit: I'm finding my A1 to be the more reliable of the two players.

I have both, but prefer HD DVD.

HD DVD.

They typically offer the best value. If BD would, I'd have no problems supporting them totally.

I own both formats.

I support HDDVD if I'm watching a HDDVD movie at the time. I support Bluray if I'm watching a Bluray movie at the time.

I have the Toshiba HD-A1 and the Samsung BD-P1200.

I like the Samsung because it loads faster than the A1.

I prefer the A1 because:
1. All features are supported. I knew that the interactive features like on all other blu-ray players weren't going to work, but I'm wondering if their going to get TrueHD working either.
2. Menus are faster.
3. I think the upconversion is more detailed on the A1. The BD-P1200 looks softer to me.
4. Purchased this for $499 in April '06. I purchased the P1200 for $540 3 weeks ago. I feel like I'm getting my money's worth with the A1.
5. I have less lockups, no sound dropout and no unrecognized discs on the A1.

The matrix films look great, so does King kong, but there isnt anyway I could say with a straight face they look better than POTC 1 or 2, or Bridge to Terabithia. Bridge blew me out of the water, it is one of the best HD presentations I have seen to date, up there with all the rest of the greats that mostly happen to be AVC, & Or Disney.

:eek:


You may need to calibrate your TV if thats what you see.

Change your audio to bitstream optical or get a HDMI reciever either way you will get 5.1 sound on a PS3.

Changing to bitstream would not help. Actually I think that is the setting I already have.

But the PS3 can only output PCM as 2.0 over optical! There is no way around it. Exept using the HDMI output which is only possible if one has a HDMI receiver.

So I would have to compensate the flawed design of the bluray player by buying a new AV amp? Another $2k-$3k down the drain for pretty much nothing? No thanks!

But then its no big deal - most of the bluray movies come with an extra DD track when there is a PCM track. And most of the good movies are on HD DVD, so I don't bother too much.

My system is calibrated just fine. And I haven't seen a player review yet that has stated that the PS-3 has equal or better PQ than ANY of the stand-alone BD players. As far as PQ between HD and BD goes, I've found that it's far more title dependent, than it is format dependent. Furthermore, since you obviously can't read, I didn't say anything about the OP saying anything about a single unit. I did bring up the fact that this is the "Dual Format Player" forum, and not the "People who have two players so they can play both formats" forum. :rolleyes:
I have. S&V compared the Samsung/Panasonic/Sony (PS3) BR players.. The reviewer said the PS3 had the fastest load times & the PQ was on par with the stand alone models..& the PS3 supports HDMI 1.3..& has onboard decoders. The others don't..

:eek:


You may need to calibrate your TV if thats what you see.

My TV is Calibrated, I am not saying Matrix doesn't look great. Kong looks awesome too. I am just saying POTC 1 & 2 and Bride to Teribithia look better (to me). Sharper, artifact free. Matrix flicks has the jellyfish like squares in several scenes. Kong looks pretty much perfect to me, I haven't seen any issues like the Matrix films had, it's just a smidge too "soft" in some spots, but it's probably just the way it is.

To the OP- I can see no consistent PQ advantage of either format over the other. Having said that, for HD I find myself gravitating towards Blu-ray, primarily because my PS3 is about ten times faster than my HD-XA1. I am also watching more SD dvds lately, due to the (mostly) sucky content available on both HD DVD and Blu-ray.

I own two players of both formats (BD-P1000 and DMP-BD10a) and so far I like HD DVD much more (XA2 and A2)

I own two players of both formats (BD-P1000 and DMP-BD10a) and so far I like HD DVD much more (XA2 and A2)

But don't you think that has more to do with the difference in the quality of the players, as opposed to the formats?

I have the LG. So by using only one player for both formats, I really don't see any difference. Both look and sound great.

I like the fact that my BD-P1000 boots up faster and seems to have less frequent playback issues, however I think the best quality transfers on HD-DVD have better PQ than blu-ray. Example Matrix trilogy vs. POTC 1 or 2.

I own the HD A2 & the PS3. The PS3 allows me to see flicks in 1080p whereas I can only access 1080i thru the Toshiba. I'm not sure I see a whole lot of difference to be honest, but I've only had the PS3 for a couple of weeks & haven't done enough comparing.

Clearly though, the audio from the PS3 is markedly superior to that of the A2. I'm connected via optical on both.

HD DVD as it's menus and extra features are better.

what can i say....

if you watch hd dvd or bluray via one player (like a htpc) they look exactly the same. I have never spotted any difference pq wise, i could account to one format. If they "look" different on a htpc, it´s a software related issue (for example power dvd using different renderers and therefore different video levels for each media) and this can be adjusted.

I'm a bit confused guys. Does anyone know if it's possible to get "true" "DTS HD" with a receiver that can internally process it (like the Onkyo 875) when using the Toshiba HD XA2? I ask because the specs on the XA2 say that it supports DTS HD "core only", but I think this refers to the PLAYER'S ability to decode it. If that same signal is sent to the receiver (like the 875), which supports DTS HD, would it then not be limited to the "core" signal only? (which I understand means it's not "lossless"). Hope that my question makes sense

I'm in the market for a DVD player to be used with a new Sony 40" XBR2. The TV will be put in a room where we exercise rather than in our primary viewing area. Also, we generally rent movies rather than buy them, and we like older classics rather than the glitzy action films that are used to show off these HD players. From this discussion, it sounds like it would make more sense to get an inexpensive SD player now, and to wait until things shake out (and prices drop) before buying either type of HD player.

Any thoughts?

Clearly though, the audio from the PS3 is markedly superior to that of the A2. I'm connected via optical on both.

Thats strange. Because using the optical out the audio from the PS3 is a lot inferior to the Toshiba A2. The PS3 delivers PCM 5.1 only as PCM 2.0 via optical. Not nice. Well even though it usually finds some 640k DD track that it can output through the optical. The A2 in contrast is able to transcode lossless sound into a 1,500k DTS track. The A3 kicks a*** in the audio division.

Maybe the PS3 sound is perceived as better because the volume level is higher. Thats a very old trick to sell mediocre audio equipment.

The PS3 is noticeably inferior to the A2 when it comes to sound. Brykos, please educate yourself before posting false information. It makes you sound like a Blue-Ray nuthugger.

I own the Tosh XA-1 and the PS3.

I also have some audio issues with the Tosh. I think it will be remedied once I upgrade to an hdmi receiver, but for now the audio is better from the PS3. I can't wait to upgrade. Hopefully sometime in the next 4-8 months.

There is no difference in video quality from these players. NONE.

Right now I prefer to use my PS3 because it is faster than the achingly slow Tosh and because of the already mentioned audio issues.

The remote on the Tosh is not so good, and neither is using the PS3 controller.

The PS3 is noticeably inferior to the A2 when it comes to sound. Brykos, please educate yourself before posting false information. It makes you sound like a Blue-Ray nuthugger.

WTF are either one of you talking about, both on optical, so long as the bit-rate of the movie is the same...they sound the same... :rolleyes: