The source audio is much more important then the codec used for encoding.

When people have compared TrueHD to DD+ the DD+ track have been 640kbps.

I think its better with a lossy 24bit track then 16bits TrueHD converted from a 24bit source.

I own a PS3 which with all indications will be fully compliant at least to 1.1 if not 2.0. I didn't come here to discuss Blu....

No, you came here to critisize Transformers in HD DVD because you cannot get it in BR, and that is trolling!

No, you sir, are attacking the Transformers HD DVD AQ (Which happens to have 10/10 AQ and 5/5 AQ from 2 independent reviewers) because you cannot get it in BR period!
Several members, which you have scorned, have painfully tried to explain to you why this is so. But your agenda remains the same.:rolleyes:
I think questioning and attacking are rather different, and I feel that true discussion is not welcome here with you as your blinders leave you to not question anything your format of choice does which is sad as there is a difference in accepting the fact there is no lossless and not caring what audio you get. So with this I will move back to the general Hdm msg board.

I think questioning and attacking are rather different, and I feel that true discussion is not welcome here with you as your blinders leave you to not question anything your format of choice does which is sad as there is a difference in accepting the fact there is no lossless and not caring what audio you get. So with this I will move back to the general Hdm msg board.

It is not your place, it is the place of a fellow HD DVD supporter to complain about the format that they support.:rolleyes:

Imagine me, a BD-less HD DVD supporter going to the BR forum and complaining about the PQ of Dracula, which I have never seen in BR. That would, and rightly so, be construed by them as trolling.

I am done talking with you.

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
__________________
Challenge the Post: Never the Poster: Please take the High Road in Every Post
Industry Insiders Q&A Thread IV

Didn't find it in there, where was it stated I could not discuss HD DVD without owing it?

That's it. I can takes it no more. Ordered.

Classic. In a movie about giant robots beating the c*** out of each other everybody wants pictures of the chick. :D

But but but there is no TrueHD? How can someone rate the AQ 5/5? :D
Is there a better version of Transformers to compare it too:confused:

The reviewer gives 10/10 because the audio presentation deserves it. Are you saying that all lossless track should get 10/10 just because it's lossless, and all DD+ track should not get 10/10 just because it's lossy?

The problem with spec shopping is that it's easy to forget what is actually being reviewed. What should be reviewed is the audio quality of the movie not the quality of an encode.

If a movie sounds like it was recorded in a tin can but the encode is lossless is that great AQ? Isn't it the audible quality of the movie that is being rated?

Put in basic terms the question is on a scale of 1-10 how good does the movie sound to you as a reviewer? Technically knowing the codec really doesn't come into play in that scenario.

Another day in the HDM sandbox! :)

http://img513.imageshack.us/img513/4878/002339233fl7.th.jpg (http://img513.imageshack.us/my.php?image=002339233fl7.jpg)

You might want to resize/crop in photoshop to your desktop resolution for the best look.

Is that painted garbage can lid in the background supposed to be a car wheel?

Megan Fox, AKA mall skank #1029130193821.

Apparently i'm going to the wrong malls. ;)

LOL, that's one good pic..

I'm sure that the DD+ sound track is amazing -- and as soon as that damned Samsung dualie comes out, I'm sure to buy this movie -- but as many reviewers have noted, I wonder why Paramount chose not to include Dolby TrueHD -- just seems like bad PR.

The presence of AVC codec in Paramount HD releases confirms that Microsoft hasn't paid them $150MM.

Does this give you some kind of point rewards over at Bluray.com? ;)

http://www.highdefdiscnews.com/?p=239

:D

http://www.highdefdiscnews.com/reviews/transformers/image3full.jpg

Yes please :)

Really happy to hear how GREAT the audio is - one can't get better than 10/10 !

Looking forward to hooking this up to my system :p

Great news.

I really would've appreciated TrueHD (that would've classified the disc as flat-out demo material), but I'm still going to give the release a chance.

I'll probably give it a rent, and check out the audio myself. I'll decide whether I purchase this or not then :) .

This review of the movie has me on the edge of my seat waiting for my copy. I did not get to see the movie in the theater so I am STOKED!
The Die Hard Blu Ray only club is about to lose a few members!
I support both formats because Im 41 years old and lifes to short to wait around for a winner...;)

So the only folks complaining so far about the audio are:

people that do not have HD-DVD.

people that rate audio by specs.

people that like 16 bit digital over 24 bit digital.

sycophantic Sony fans.


And the people that like the audio are:

Folks that actually have seen the movie on HD-DVD.

This is one of the best sounding discs I have ever heard. I have a hard time believing it can sounde any better with TrueHD or DTS-MA. THis is reference audio and video.

Nice.. That what i call "Perfect Picture quality" :D

"The CG special effects with the robots look absolutely amazing in High Definition. In fact the transformations of the robots plagued the DVD release with tons of pixilation and artifacts. Well I can safely say to you that is not the case on this HD DVD release.

Overall Paramount (DreamWorks) has done a perfect video transfer of this film. It IS worth all the hype and then some."

this movie is going to be the demo in shops for HD-DVD, I am sure seeing the reviews so far.Things are getting better everyday here for HD-DVD --more players--more studios--more hardware--more software.Things on the other side not going so good .

A review is up on my sie as well. To those who complain about no True HD, you must check out this disc. No complaints here!

My review is up. This is a reference disc for video and AUDIO! The Dolby Plus track is amazing. I can't imagine how it could sound better with TrueHD.

My review is up. This is a reference disc for video and AUDIO! The Dolby Plus track is amazing. I can't imagine how it could sound better with TrueHD.Nice review Joe...will be getting this next week for sure. ;)

Looks like a solid release, definitely a keeper! PQ: 8/10, AQ: 10/10

Some will always complain about there being no lossless audio track, but I've heard some incredible DD+ tracks, and Transformers sounds like it will be another top notch audio track to show you what DD+ is capable of. Click here (http://www.dvdtown.com/reviews/transformers/5245/1) to read the full review.

The complaints come mostly from those supporting the other format. Oh wait not only is that format missing a TrueHD track it is also missing the accompanying True Transformers video. Oh the shame of it all. Oh well, they can always watch a blue screen. ;)

I knew as soon as I heard that Transformers wasn't getting a lossless audio track that the Blu-ray people would grab their torches and pitchforks and try to make a mountain out of a very insignificant molehill. Especially when reviewers are all saying the DD+ tracks sounds awesome.

The whole motivation for this argument stems from the fact that Transformers has been taken away from Blu-ray fans. They will find every possible justification for attacking it's HD DVD release, no matter how insignificant.

I've heard that the TRANSFORMERS discs are not nearly as shiny as they would be if they were BR!:mad:

My review is up. This is a reference disc for video and AUDIO! The Dolby Plus track is amazing. I can't imagine how it could sound better with TrueHD.

Awesome review! I think you should start your own thread though, since some people might miss it :), I cant wait to get this Disc, 3 more days!

I don't agree with him, but he is entitled to his opinion and as he has stated he is here for HD DVD. We all want the best out of our formats. The only thing we disagree on is what defines "the best."

Yeah, but he hasn't heard it yet!

I knew as soon as I heard that Transformers wasn't getting a lossless audio track that the Blu-ray people would grab their torches and pitchforks and try to make a mountain out of a very insignificant molehill. Especially when reviewers are all saying the DD+ tracks sounds awesome.

The whole motivation for this argument stems from the fact that Transformers has been taken away from Blu-ray fans. They will find every possible justification for attacking it's HD DVD release, no matter how insignificant.

When someone doesn't have a valid argument they usually resort to red herrings, ad hominems, and strawmans. The discussion is about TF, not Blu-ray. I'll buy this title on Tuesday, and I have no doubt that I'll love every bit of it. My problem is with people who say the audio can't get any better. 24 bit lossless > 24 bit lossy. If you don't think so then you have no business reviewing movies.

Why have a 10 point scale if you refuse to reserve 10/10 for perfect? Are you saying that 9/10 isn't an excellent score? If it's not then what is it? Fair?

So the only folks complaining so far about the audio are:

people that do not have HD-DVD.

people that rate audio by specs.

people that like 16 bit digital over 24 bit digital.

sycophantic Sony fans.


And the people that like the audio are:

Folks that actually have seen the movie on HD-DVD.

Chico: "Who you gonna believe? Me or your lying eyes (ears)?"

Man, can't wait for this now after reading all the great REAL reviews, simple mindless fun, but who the hell cares when the ride looks and sounds so good...this is a blind buy for me, but from everything I've read, I'll luv this - as a kid, I used to LOVE the Godzilla flicks, this seems not much different - beautiful & big robots fighting it out over cities while the people run for their lives below, only now theres no cheese\laugh factor from the effects not being convincing - sweet!!

I can already tell I'm not gonna be feeling well on tues morn: "Hey boss, I'm a little under the weather :::cough:::, can't make it today, should be in tomorrow though, think I'll have to hit Best Buy, errr, the drug store for some medecine, ::cough:::" ;) :p

EDIT: This sequence looks INSANE!!!: OH YEAH (http://www.highdefdiscnews.com/reviews/transformers/image8full.jpg) :D:D

My review is up. This is a reference disc for video and AUDIO! The Dolby Plus track is amazing. I can't imagine how it could sound better with TrueHD.

Yes...but what's the bitrate?:p

A review is up on my sie as well. To those who complain about no True HD, you must check out this disc. No complaints here!

Great review, other than the line about not thinking lossless would sound better =) Looking forward to picking this one up on Tuesday!

Chico: "Who you gonna believe? Me or your lying eyes (ears)?"

Originally Posted by crowded
So the only folks complaining so far about the audio are:

people that do not have HD-DVD.

people that rate audio by specs.

people that like 16 bit digital over 24 bit digital.

sycophantic Sony fans.


And the people that like the audio are:

Folks that actually have seen the movie on HD-DVD.

Pretty much sums it up, doesn't it? :D

God dayuuum this format war. I would soooo love to get this title. Sigh, unfortunately I can only afford one format. If only blu ray didn't have so many exclusives that I loved, I'd be in the hd dvd camp instead. ( Personally I prefer it on a price stand point and the red casings! ) :(

When someone doesn't have a valid argument they usually resort to red herrings, ad hominems, and strawmans. The discussion is about TF, not Blu-ray. I'll buy this title on Tuesday, and I have no doubt that I'll love every bit of it. My problem is with people who say the audio can't get any better. 24 bit lossless > 24 bit lossy. If you don't think so then you have no business reviewing movies.

Why have a 10 point scale if you refuse to reserve 10/10 for perfect? Are you saying that 9/10 isn't an excellent score? If it's not then what is it? Fair?

I haven't read where people are saying the audio can't be any better. What I'm reading is better "a subjective term" in what way over DD+? After all, one can compare this debate to those that will say BR is better than HD DVD. The obvious question is....at what cost and how much better is BR over HD DVD how is that "better" manifest?

God dayuuum this format war. I would soooo love to get this title. Sigh, unfortunately I can only afford one format. If only blu ray didn't have so many exclusives that I loved, I'd be in the hd dvd camp instead. ( Personally I prefer it on a price stand point and the red casings! ) :(

That a hint...read my signature. ;)

Is anyone else sick of this "could have sounded/looked better if more inaudible/invisible bits that the filesize/bit-meter would have told me would have made it sound/look better" routine?

It's bad enough that we have people who do this work (audio recording and mixing) for a living (and have so for many years) who say they can't hear a difference between 1.5 MB DD+ and TrueHD.

It's bad enough that we've shown tests that people have a very hard time distinguishing 128 and 192 kbps encodes from their CD track equivalents and that DD+ at 1.5 is 3 to 5 times that bitrate per channel.

But now the placebo-spec-whores are starting to say "if-if-if would-have-should-have-could-have" on a title that hasn't even been released! Reviewers are giving it perfect scores, and without even hearing it, the bit-o-meter police are already claiming it "could have" sounded better.

Unbelievable.

Apparently i'm going to the wrong malls. ;)
I second that.:D

That a hint...read my signature. ;)

Man I wish I can. But I just spent a bomb on my home theater and new home so I had just enough left for one high definition player. Sigh. Even if I could get a hd dvd player, because of my schedule and budget ( I ain't gettin no xbox hd dvd add on or some chinese player crap ) I would probably only get it in february. That's a looooooooooong ass wait to watch transformers on hd. If only paramount went exclusive after transformers. Haha

But... how can a DD+ track get such a good score!!! I thought a movie had to have a lossless track to sound good ;)

IF it had a True HD track it would have gott'n a 12 for sure :)

Is anyone else sick of this "could have sounded/looked better if more inaudible/invisible bits that the filesize/bit-meter would have told me would have made it sound/look better" routine?

It's bad enough that we have people who do this work (audio recording and mixing) for a living (and have so for many years) who say they can't hear a difference between 1.5 MB DD+ and TrueHD.

It's bad enough that we've shown tests that people have a very hard time disinguishing 128 and 192 kbps encodes from their CD track equivalents and that DD+ at 1.5 is 3 to 5 times that bitrate per channel.

But now the placebo-spec-whores are starting to say "if-if-if would-have-should-have-could-have" on a title that hasn't even been released! Reviewers are giving it perfect scores, and without even hearing it, the bit-o-meter police are already claiming it "could have" sounded better.

Unbelievable.

+10

Well I have a 360 HD Drive so I cant get DDTRUE HD anyway. I'm just haooy to have a HD player at $150 bucks and Transformers on Tuesday :D

http://www.highdefdiscnews.com/?p=239
Woot, this now my new wallpaper..:D:D
Well, hopefully Amazon ships mine out on the 15th.:o

http://i63.photobucket.com/albums/h127/brian32672/dfgdfg.jpg

Megan Fox, AKA mall skank #1029130193821.

Bless each and every one of them. ;)

reviewers are giving it perfect scores?

you mean those same reviewers that give Halo 3 a perfect 10?

give me a break. a reviewer is a human just as everybody else. they are not better or worse then we are.

they will also go with hype, $$$ etc.

also if you talk with music professionals. they will say lossless is better then DD+

just because filmmixer does not agree with this. does that make him the messiah of audio mixing? lol

me and many other people hear differences between lossless and DD+ . same as we can hear differences between lossless 16bit and lossless 24bit.

otherwise compare the DD+ audio track of flags of fathers hddvd with the lossless audio track on the german bluray release.

if you do not hear any difference. then your either deaf or you have a problem with your audio system. because the difference is easy to hear.

the lossless track is much fuller in sound. more clear dialogs as well.

that said . i am sure Transformer Audio track will rock, but please do not go in defend mode that DD+ is as good ass true-dts or lpcm. when there are already examples out there it aint as good.

again invest in Flag of fathers hd-dvd and the german bluray release and you can hear it for yourself.

peace

Another perfect audio score? How can that be? DD+ is total crap ;)

reviewers are giving it perfect scores?

you mean those same reviewers that give Halo 3 a perfect 10?

give me a break. a reviewer is a human just as everybody else. they are not better or worse then we are.

they will also go with hype, $$$ etc.

also if you talk with music professionals. they will say lossless is better then DD+

just because filmmixer does not agree with this. does that make him the messiah of audio mixing? lol

me and many other people hear differences between lossless and DD+ . same as we can hear differences between lossless 16bit and lossless 24bit.

otherwise compare the DD+ audio track of flags of fathers hddvd with the lossless audio track on the german bluray release.

if you do not hear any difference. then your either deaf or you have a problem with your audio system. because the difference is easy to hear.

the lossless track is much fuller in sound. more clear dialogs as well.

that said . i am sure Transformer Audio track will rock, but please do not go in defend mode that DD+ is as good ass true-dts or lpcm. when there are already examples out there it aint as good.

again invest in Flag of fathers hd-dvd and the german bluray release and you can hear it for yourself.

peace


Did anyone understand this incoherent mess? I'm sure there was a point in there.


Somewhere.

I'm sure there was a point in there.


Somewhere.

The point from many lately seems to be...






ENVY. ;)

Did anyone understand this incoherent mess? I'm sure there was a point in there.


Somewhere.

Sort of sounded like an irate tantrum to me, not sure.

Just wondering...these people who can easily tell the difference between 16bit lossless and 24bit lossless...these people who can hear the difference between a well mixed, 1.5Mbps DD+ and lossless audio track...how did they live in the days of VHS? I can only imagine they'd have to watch the movie with subtitles and the volume off to avoid rupturing their fragile eardrums.

It's a like a girl picking out her engagement ring and telling people, "Oh, yeah, definitely, I can totally tell the difference between a Flawless and Internally Flawless diamond...I mean, just look at them...you'd have to be blind not to see the difference."

Fortunately, I seem to be deaf by some people's definition, and my wife and I are able to enjoy our 5.1 system in blissful ignorance. In fact, if you can believe it, our speaker set came in a box with the receiver. Yeah...that's right...we're slummin' it over here.;)

Did anyone understand this incoherent mess? I'm sure there was a point in there.

I understood it perfectly.

No grain ????, but they was Plenty in cinema... actually the worst scene is when sam see Bubblebee for the first time casting his Autobot Logo... that scene was O'grain of Plently in cinema. I saw it 5 times LOL. Day scene where great, but night scene were no where perfect. Anyway ;) Guess i'll see that tuesday ;)

The problem is not that it's :

Star Trek is getting TrueHD
All Catalog Title are getting TrueHD, the Jack Ryan Boxset have TrueHD... but not the biggest grossing movie of the year?

I mean it's like offering me a card with a CD in MP3 format for Xmas while the CD is available for almost the same price.

With HDM, we can get Loseless, even if you're not actually hearing it or anything, when it's on the disc, it's the closest thing you can have to the actual soundtrack master..

reviewers are giving it perfect scores?

you mean those same reviewers that give Halo 3 a perfect 10?

No, not the same reviewers. I have no idea what world you live in where there's only a fixed number of reviewers, and they review every product on the market from video games to movies, but that's not how it works. I didn't even bother reading what appeared to be a half thought out (and poorly punctuated) rant by someone who uses vague terms in referring to people (talk to SOME ENGINEERS!) and going into damage control mode for a product he doesn't own or have any REAL insight to beyond being just a message board guy.

Does anyone see the absurdity in the fact that people are quibbling over the differences between 1.5mb DD+ and TruHD when the codecs compressing these movies ignore 95-97% of the visual movie data and yet there are claims of "transpareny to the master" on some of them?

This is one of the best sounding discs I have ever heard. I have a hard time believing it can sounde any better with TrueHD or DTS-MA. THis is reference audio and video.

That very well may be true -- but the question stands, why not include a TrueHD track?

If it sounds the same who cares? My god, don't rely on a spec sheet, trust your ears. This is getting like CD vs. vinyl in 1883. Oh my, look at the spec sheet for the new CD players. Much better than analog. Quess what, listening tests showed the opposite. Maybe the recording engineers know more than we do and fell that DD+ at max bit rate sounds the same. Have you tried Transformers? I doubt that you will be anything other than shocked at how good it sounds.

As stated in a few other places, I don't see why it's trolling to ask Why the movie doesn't include a TrueHD track -- I'm sure the soundtrack is amazing, but it's still an honest question, is it not?

If it sounds the same who cares? My god, don't rely on a spec sheet, trust your ears. This is getting like CD vs. vinyl in 1883. Oh my, look at the spec sheet for the new CD players. Much better than analog. Quess what, listening tests showed the opposite. Maybe the recording engineers know more than we do and fell that DD+ at max bit rate sounds the same. Have you tried Transformers? I doubt that you will be anything other than shocked at how good it sounds.

I'm not trying to get into a war over DD+ and lossless here -- it's a valid question -- even if they sound exactly the same, why not include the lossless track? If for no other reason than marketing (a point, I might add, that even FilmMixer agrees with). It just seems like bad PR -- and would have avoided this whole discussion in the first place.

If the Paramount engineers (or the encoders who work for them) were convinced they sound the same, why would they ever use TrueHD at all?

Ask away but unless you are an insider, there is no way for us to know. All we do here is speculate with no factual basis at all. This is the internet after all! All I can do is judge the actual product received. As to Flags, maybe the German release had a better encode on the audio side. I have CD's and LP's from Europe that sound better than their CD counterparts in the US and visa versa. Maybe that's the difference and not DD+ vs. TrueHD?

I assume DD+ is pretty similar to the DTS MA core at 1.5 mbps which is still good but not "great"

DD and DTS use completely different encoding techniques. The former, DD uses a more efficient system of encoding and thus would more than likely equate to an even higher bit rate needed on the DTS track.

I'd really like for you to see what the lossless version looks like on a spectrum analyzer and then compare it to the DD+ version. I worked with digital audio encoding and decoding in college and compared analog waveforms to digital counterparts with much lower bitrates than this. DD+ is an incredible encoding scheme and it is too bad that "philes" get involved with all this talk here as the elitism of this Lossless vs Lossy talk is ridiculous.

The only way to know is if they tell us.

The only way to know is if they tell us.

Well yes, I suppose that is true.

Still, if we never discussed things because we were waiting for the official response, these forums would dry up quicker than the Sahara desert during a sand storm. :p

Sometimes I think that may not be a bad idea, especially on the HD-BD debate!

To the OP thank you for taking the time to post the review. To everyone b*tching about the review itself...could you just keep drinking until you pass out.

thanks

getme

Is anyone else sick of this "could have sounded/looked better if more inaudible/invisible bits that the filesize/bit-meter would have told me would have made it sound/look better" routine?

It's bad enough that we have people who do this work (audio recording and mixing) for a living (and have so for many years) who say they can't hear a difference between 1.5 MB DD+ and TrueHD.

It's bad enough that we've shown tests that people have a very hard time distinguishing 128 and 192 kbps encodes from their CD track equivalents and that DD+ at 1.5 is 3 to 5 times that bitrate per channel.

But now the placebo-spec-whores are starting to say "if-if-if would-have-should-have-could-have" on a title that hasn't even been released! Reviewers are giving it perfect scores, and without even hearing it, the bit-o-meter police are already claiming it "could have" sounded better.

Unbelievable.
+1

I'm not trying to get into a war over DD+ and lossless here -- it's a valid question -- even if they sound exactly the same, why not include the lossless track? If for no other reason than marketing (a point, I might add, that even FilmMixer agrees with). It just seems like bad PR -- and would have avoided this whole discussion in the first place.

If the Paramount engineers (or the encoders who work for them) were convinced they sound the same, why would they ever use TrueHD at all?

This is a very valid point. HD DVD is trying to win a war, but Paramount is not willing to give the best perceived quality in this release. Whether or not someone can actually tell the difference is irrelevant. The problem is with image, and the perceived image is we don't want to give you the best, we want to give you what passes for good enough. That really may not be the case, but that is probably how a lot of customers will perceive it.

DD+ is an incredible encoding scheme and it is too bad that "philes" get involved with all this talk here as the elitism of this Lossless vs Lossy talk is ridiculous.
If you follow the insiders thread, you'll see those who actually author audio tracks for films say they can't tell the difference between DD+ and the master, listening in the studio using headphones.

I wouldn't put the crowd who keep spewing the rote about lossless audio in the "philes" category.

Sometimes I think that may not be a bad idea, especially on the HD-BD debate!

Ha! You've got me there -- when I eventually do make the plunge on HD media, it's going to be the dual format route -- and I'll no doubt pick up Transformers -- Me likes explosions and talking robots as much as the next guy! I just don't see the point of all this "My platform is perfect and your format was created by Satan" ranting by people on both sides.

It's an interesting psychological experiment waiting to happen -- how people can become so invested in a piece of silicon and electronics that are so similar in their end products -- obviously, people put down their hard earned money (or not so hard earned in some cases...) and picked a format. The thought that they might have picked incorrectly would sting a little bit, I guess -- so, they go out of their way to find flaws in the other format, ignore flaws in their own, and look childish doing both.

Still, that's horrendously off-topic, and I apologize for that. ;)

This is a very valid point. HD DVD is trying to win a war, but Paramount is not willing to give the best perceived quality in this release. Whether or not someone can actually tell the difference is irrelevant. The problem is with image, and the perceived image is we don't want to give you the best, we want to give you what passes for good enough. That really may not be the case, but that is probably how a lot of customers will perceive it.

HD DVD - "The Look of Perfect and the Sound of Good Enough®" -- :D

ha, just kidding everyone, no need to break out the digital pitch forks!

This is a very well-reasoned reply (I say with a grin because it's in agreement with my previous post...ha) -- Some customers, even customers who aren't disgruntled blu-ray fans cursing the very air Paramount executives breath, do think there are differences. And whether they are wrong or not, and they may well be, Paramount could have avoided this entire conversation.

I don't really believe it's because their encoders felt TrueHD was good enough -- otherwise, why provide a TrueHD track ever?

If you follow the insiders thread, you'll see those who actually author audio tracks for films say they can't tell the difference between DD+ and the master, listening in the studio using headphones.

I wouldn't put the crowd who keep spewing the rote about lossless audio in the "philes" category.

As I've stated before, this has nothing at all to do whether DD+ is as good as TrueHD. Some points to consider:

1) If DD+ is as good as TrueHD, why have TrueHD at all?
2) If we have TrueHD, and it's no better than lossy, but studios simply want "feature creep," why did Paramount not use it this time?
3) If it's because "DD+ was good enough," why would Paramount ever use TrueHD?

Even FilmMixer (to whom I fully apologize for getting involved! ;) )has wondered why studios don't always lossless tracks, if for no other reason than marketing and PR.

HD DVD - "The Look of Perfect and the Sound of Good Enough®" -- :D

ha, just kidding everyone, no need to break out the digital pitch forks!

This is a very well-reasoned reply (I say with a grin because it's in agreement with my previous post...ha) -- Some customers, even customers who aren't disgruntled blu-ray fans cursing the very air Paramount executives breath, do think there are differences. And whether they are wrong or not, and they will may be, Paramount could have avoided this entire conversation.

I don't really believe it's because their encoders felt TrueHD was good enough -- otherwise, why provide a TrueHD track ever?

Well, they could have avoided so many arguments if they had just done it. You know the ones, "Oh the bit rate can't handle it" or "They didn't have space" and things like that. This was the perfect title to do that. I am probably one of the one that can't tell the difference between DD+ and True HD, but I wish they had put it on there just to quell these arguments.

Well, they could have avoided so many arguments if they had just done it. You know the ones, "Oh the bit rate can't handle it" or "They didn't have space" and things like that. This was the perfect title to do that. I am probably one of the one that can't tell the difference between DD+ and True HD, but I wish they had put it on there just to quell these arguments.

I completely and whole-heartedly agree. Couldn't have put it better myself, though I've tried on multiple occasions. :eek:

The problem with spec shopping is that it's easy to forget what is actually being reviewed. What should be reviewed is the audio quality of the movie not the quality of an encode.

If a movie sounds like it was recorded in a tin can but the encode is lossless is that great AQ? Isn't it the audible quality of the movie that is being rated?

Put in basic terms the question is on a scale of 1-10 how good does the movie sound to you as a reviewer? Technically knowing the codec really doesn't come into play in that scenario.

+1

Further, did the people using the woulda/coulda/shoulda argument complain about every SD-DVD review that gave a perfect Audio score on discs that didn't use a full bitrate DTS track? In theory a full bitrate DTS track should sound better than DD, no?

But archangel and jclark here is the thing. And I keep saying this because sometimes those of us on the AVS Forum think we're the only ones who own HDM players. :)

Other than the 10 people here who complained and claimed "no lossless, no sale", out in the retail world do you think Paramount's decision to do DD+ has had ANY effect on the public sales of the movie? Maybe for the .01% of people that have Dolby TrueHD receivers, maybe. But for everyone else, the answer is no.

We don't know why Paramount didn't do it. We will likely never know unless Dreamworks comes out and says so. Maybe it was cost? Maybe it was because they simply didn't feel the need to deal with the encode if their DD+ encode was easier to work with and gave just as good a sound?

Lack of a lossless track has not stopped reviewers from giving the audio perfect scores. And it hasn't stopped this disc from being #6 on Amazon for the last what, 2 weeks? Nor has it stopped the stories of distributer channel sell-outs and such.

That's a question I'd love to ask FilmMixer when he comes back around.

<snip>when I eventually do make the plunge on HD media <snip>
Ah. So you're another one of the "I don't own anything, yet I have an opinion on everything" posters. That figures. Come back when you have some actual experience with the technologies being discussed. Until then, enough with the trolling.

Well, they could have avoided so many arguments if they had just done it. You know the ones, "Oh the bit rate can't handle it" or "They didn't have space" and things like that. This was the perfect title to do that. I am probably one of the one that can't tell the difference between DD+ and True HD, but I wish they had put it on there just to quell these arguments.

What really is there to argue about? You dont see the gaggle of people buying the SD DVD complaining about their lossy encodes, do you? Who are the ones arguing though? BR supporters who wont be seeing this released on their format. Independent, separate reviewers have stated the audio is incredible but still those who have NOT even heard the soundtrack are arguing the audio could be better. And even if there was a TrueHD track the arguement would then turn to "the movie was crap, anyway".

This so called "issue" should be looked at closely and be seen for what it really is - the rantings of a few BR supporters unhappy Transformers wont be released on their format. For everyone else who is willing to enjoy a movie for what it is and not stare at bit-rate meters and compare 24bit vs 16 bit there is no issue. Just sit back and enjoy.

Ah. So you're another one of the "I don't own anything, yet I have an opinion on everything" posters. It figures. Come back when you have some acutal experience with the technologies being discussed. Until then, enough with the trolling.

You know, its sad thats its come to this but I wholeheartedly agree, enough with these I've never experienced either format but have an opinion on everything related to them posers er I meant posters. I've owned one of the formats over and year and the other for ten months and can tell you point blank; most of the stuff bantered around by these non-owners is complete bunk.

Is a 16-bit PCM or TrueHD track perfect and deserving of a perfect score? What about a 24-bit PCM or TrueHD track? Which is more perfect, a 24-bit lossy track, or 16-bit lossless track? They could all sound excellent now couldn't they, and a 10/10 rating is what the audio on Transformers deserves because it is excellent.

True. If it included a True HD 24 bit soundtrack, I'm sure this DD+ track would still be great, however it will get downgraded to being an 8 or so

I'm now convinced that lossless is the way to go for audio, and have decided that I should convert all the MP3 files in my collection to FLAC ;)

But archangel and jclark here is the thing. And I keep saying this because sometimes those of us on the AVS Forum think we're the only ones who own HDM players. :)

Other than the 10 people here who complained and claimed "no lossless, no sale", out in the retail world do you think Paramount's decision to do DD+ has had ANY effect on the public sales of the movie? Maybe for the .01% of people that have Dolby TrueHD receivers, maybe. But for everyone else, the answer is no.

We don't know why Paramount didn't do it. We will likely never know unless Dreamworks comes out and says so. Maybe it was cost? Maybe it was because they simply didn't feel the need to deal with the encode if their DD+ encode was easier to work with and gave just as good a sound?

Lack of a lossless track has not stopped reviewers from giving the audio perfect scores. And it hasn't stopped this disc from being #6 on Amazon for the last what, 2 weeks? Nor has it stopped the stories of distributer channel sell-outs and such.

That's a question I'd love to ask FilmMixer when he comes back around.

My last post before I go hide under my rock again. All I am trying to say is that the HD DVD group could get more BD supporters interested if they gave similar specs for movies. Again, there may not be any real benefit to the addition, but the people that are concerned about HD DVD limitation would be shown that there is no reason. I think that it would have been a huge blow in favor of HD DVD instead of a great movie to enjoy. I kind of thinking along the lines of long term benefits instead of just selling a movie.

I will shut up now. :)

......

are those actual frame grabs from the disc? :eek::eek::eek:

If they are then I am going to be VERY, VERY happy!

Those are promotional images, right?

The lossless vs lossy debate seems to penetrate every single thread related to Transformers. To sum up, some don't care and some do care that True HD was not included. The fact of the matter is, it was not included for whatever reason. Can the audio still sound superb? Absolutely. The point of codecs is to compress the audio/video while trying to maintain as close the the original source as possible. A great encoding can sound just as good as the original, thus the existence of encodings and bit rates and all that jazz. Are encodings always perfect? Absolutely not, but it is having a lossy codec does not automatically mean the sound is inferior. Judging by the reviews (or at least the couple that have posted thus far), the DD+ soundtrack is exceptional and with nothing else to compare it to rates quite high. The True HD soundtrack may have sounded exactly the same. It may not have. Who knows. If the reviewer thinks the audio is perfect, then that is his right. You don't rate audio/video based on the codec used. I'm sure this debate will continue with this title, with Shrek 3, and Stardust, and whatever else Paramount releases without lossless sound. What we deserve is a high definition presentation and if the DD+ provides that, then why the animosity? It's not about settling for less but getting the best out of each codec. I have not heard the soundtrack myself but if I judge it to be unacceptable then I might have a complaint that True HD should have been used but I don't need to fool my senses in thinking it is inferior just because it isn't lossless. Just my opinion.

A great encode will never be able to sound just as good as the original.. That is a fact. The original will always sound better in a comparison with the proper equipment. You can argue that 99% of people don't have such an audio system and you would be correct. However this is the audio video science forum and many of us can tell the difference and are enthusiasts.. In this case, the definition of "just as good" differs from yours which is fine.. However what all this boils down to with Transformers is the question "why?" didn't it have a TrueHD track.. It was so they didn't have to dumb down the video any further so that it looks better. The same thing happened with King Kong. I say enough already. This is the "next gen" format, it should have both next gen audio and video along with any extra's.. There is no doubt in my mind had Transformers been released on Blu-Ray, it would easily be able to fit High Def audio and have room for all the extra's that come on the second disc...

...Those are promotional images, right?
I am positive they are straight from the HD disc.
(even if they are not, certainly they will be 1920x1080, as with the first pic)

But archangel and jclark here is the thing. And I keep saying this because sometimes those of us on the AVS Forum think we're the only ones who own HDM players. :)

Other than the 10 people here who complained and claimed "no lossless, no sale", out in the retail world do you think Paramount's decision to do DD+ has had ANY effect on the public sales of the movie? Maybe for the .01% of people that have Dolby TrueHD receivers, maybe. But for everyone else, the answer is no.

No complaints here, and you make very good points!!!

We don't know why Paramount didn't do it. We will likely never know unless Dreamworks comes out and says so. Maybe it was cost? Maybe it was because they simply didn't feel the need to deal with the encode if their DD+ encode was easier to work with and gave just as good a sound?

Since we're talking about Paramount, ... I wouldn't be surprised that they release the "Michael Bay's Director's Cut Ultimate Collector Special Edition 'Transformers' HD DVD w/TrueHD" next year or two 2009 - just in time for "Transformers 2" Movie Release!?!?!

I've double, ... tripled-dip a bunch of Paramount SD DVDs over the years!!! (Hunt for Red October SE w/DTS; Star Trek Movies SCE; etc.)


Lack of a lossless track has not stopped reviewers from giving the audio perfect scores. And it hasn't stopped this disc from being #6 on Amazon for the last what, 2 weeks? Nor has it stopped the stories of distributer channel sell-outs and such.

Last 09-09-2007, 06:09 AM "Transformers" HD DVD - Amazon.com Sales Rank: #4

That was over a month ago, ... and now that we're getting closer to the October 16th HD DVD release, ... it may reach #4 or higher again!?!

That's a question I'd love to ask FilmMixer when he comes back around.

Remember, "FilmMixer" (Film Sound and Post Production Insider - Re-Recording Mixer, Hollywood, CA.) AVS Insider is ONE such person that has compared the ...

1) Master
vs.
2) Lossless THD encode
vs.
3) 1.5 DD+ encode


... and he wrote ...

AVS thread post #480 (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=11532069#post11532069)

But I would be a fool and a liar if I told you that I could discern the difference between the master, a lossless THD encode and a 1.5 DD+ encode 9 times out of 10, even with my own tracks. That's why "just good enough" does it for me and I spend my energy on more important issues (like trying to save theatrical presentation from getting any worse than it is.)
__________________
Film Sound and Post Production Insider

Re-Recording Mixer, Hollywood, CA.

Let's examine "FilmMixer" for a second ...

1) He Is A Professional Film Mixer
.... a) Mixed around 90 films

2) With 8 years of experience with master films at 24/48 (digital films)!!!
.... a) Including "We Were Soldiers" (DD+ - DVDTalk HD Audio 5 stars (http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/read.php?ID=23581&___rd=1))

3) Far Superior electronics - than we own and could ever hope for

4) Far Superior Studio Monitors - than we own and could ever hope for

5) Far Superior Optimum Sonic Mixing Studio - which I know that none of us have!!! ...

... and based on the above 5-Points, ... Logic dictates that I would certainly take HIS WORDS as verbatim vs. some self-proclaimed audio expert who is nothing more that a HT consumer hobbiest.

He brings out another very good point in an earlier post ...


AVS thread post #470 (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=11529424#post11529424)

Unless you have heard the originals, or compared the master to a lossless encode to a lossy encode, all of these complaints are moot. Even if you are striving for the best absolute presentation possible.

AVS'ers get way too caught up on specs, with out any real practical experience, and that is what this thread is really for.

One of the titles that really changed my mind in the lossy vs. lossless debate was "Dreamgirls." I had heard the original masters on the mixing stage, and I can tell you that the HD DVD was pretty spectacular.

And even, as some point out, this is a "paper war backed on specs," the fact is that even if Paramount/DW was still in the BR camp, the BR release would probably only include a 640 DD track and no internet enabled features, so the spec war, IMHO, would still "favor" the HD DVD on this title alone, based on DW/Paramount's past performance.

Food for thought ... 3-days until "Transformers" HD DVD arrives!!! :D
Phil

I'm now convinced that lossless is the way to go for audio, and have decided that I should convert all the MP3 files in my collection to FLAC ;)Actually, since detail is lost in the conversion from digital to analog, you should probably keep all your music on extremely high quality vinyl. And future HDM could have 8 individual vinyl discs that could be played (one for each channel) as movie disc is playing. (Of course, the video disk will be 24 HDR TIFF images per second!):D

Ok...so I got a little carried away there...but I was enjoying myself.:D

A great encode will never be able to sound just as good as the original.. That is a fact. The original will always sound better in a comparison with the proper equipment. You can argue that 99% of people don't have such an audio system and you would be correct. However this is the audio video science forum and many of us can tell the difference and are enthusiasts.. In this case, the definition of "just as good" differs from yours which is fine.. However what all this boils down to with Transformers is the question "why?" didn't it have a TrueHD track.. It was so they didn't have to dumb down the video any further so that it looks better. The same thing happened with King Kong. I say enough already. This is the "next gen" format, it should have both next gen audio and video along with any extra's.. There is no doubt in my mind had Transformers been released on Blu-Ray, it would easily be able to fit High Def audio and have room for all the extra's that come on the second disc...

Wow... I guess High Def audio is limited to blu ray... oh wait, what about Troy: Director's Cut, Matrix, blah, blah, blah. I also guess the blu-ray would also have the "Transfomers HUD" :p As for all the extras on the second disc... isn't POTC two discs? Oh well, you're point is moot anyways because Transformers is not coming out to blu-ray. Enjoy the pixelated SD version instead :D



EDIT: btw, this is the HD DVD section, not the BR section.

If they are, then Paramount better tell me what H.264 encoder they used to get that sort of quality. Wow.

I think that it would have been a huge blow in favor of HD DVD instead of a great movie to enjoy.

And here I thought having great movies to enjoy was the whole point of this high def format war.....
I guess I stand corrected!
Its all about the SPECS!!
Not the movies!! /sarcasm off

Man I wish I can. But I just spent a bomb on my home theater and new home so I had just enough left for one high definition player. Sigh. Even if I could get a hd dvd player, because of my schedule and budget ( I ain't gettin no xbox hd dvd add on or some chinese player crap ) I would probably only get it in february. That's a looooooooooong ass wait to watch transformers on hd. If only paramount went exclusive after transformers. Haha

I assume you have an xbox 360, so I believe they would want to release Transformers on the Marketplace, you could spend a few bucks on the HD download, yeah it won't look as good as the HD DVD but you still get to watch Transformers in HD

Sorry guys, but I think those are promo shots. The exact same frame (the one of the girl hanging over the car) appears in IMDB's promotional pictures section.

I wish we could get encodes that were THAT good!

Edit: also, I'm not familiar with this film (I didn't see it theatrically.... I know, I know, I should have), but it's 2.35:1. So those images couldn't be straight off the disc.

Yeah baby! Can't wait until Tuesday! I'm SO glad I took the "red pill". :D

( I ain't gettin no xbox hd dvd add on or some chinese player crap )

Too bad you've never actually seen the quality of the HD DVD add-on. I assure you that you don't know what you're talking about. :)

Especially when you get it for $179 and what now 5 free movies? That's a steal.

You're making too many valid points, piturra! There is no room for that kind of thought process here. ;)

My last post before I go hide under my rock again. All I am trying to say is that the HD DVD group could get more BD supporters interested if they gave similar specs for movies. Again, there may not be any real benefit to the addition, but the people that are concerned about HD DVD limitation would be shown that there is no reason. I think that it would have been a huge blow in favor of HD DVD instead of a great movie to enjoy. I kind of thinking along the lines of long term benefits instead of just selling a movie.

I will shut up now. :)


Well, ask yourself this. If you're Paramount, who are you shooting for? Are you shooting for the small amount of BD supporters out there, or for tha mass mainstream consumer market?

I'm sure they are looking over the niche market right now and looking directly at the j6p market. Remember that's the reason they moved to HD DVD; cheaper players mean better shot at the mass market.

And so far 99.9% of the mass market still has older DD/DTS receivers. So on a blockbuster movie that they need to get out the door on time and into the hands of the most people, why mess with an encode that might take them longer to finish, only to be played on less than a percent of the actual people out there buying players? Why not make sure the picture quality is up to snuff first, and use a DD+ encode that was likely easier to encode and quicker to finish, and yet sounded just as good?

The only PR game Paramount has to look at is for us here on forums. The people walking into Best Buy or Walmart to pick up an A3 and Transformers aren't going to care one bit that the sound is only DD+ and not lossless.

I would wager that when more people start getting into lossless sound with receiver sales and such, you'll see Paramount shift effort.

And here I thought having great movies to enjoy was the whole point of this high def format war.....
I guess I stand corrected!
Its all about the SPECS!!
Not the movies!! /sarcasm off

LOL! Okay this is my last post before I crawl under my rock. :D That should been "instead of just a great movie to watch". For an HD DVD owner yes that is what it is all about, but for a format that is trying to win a war I don't think that it is. The more people that buy players, the bigger market to sell your movies and the stronger the format. So the greater perceived value, True HD, the greater marketing potential. The greater the marketing, hopefully more people buy players and your movies. I think that a lot of times it is the hype that sells, and not the merit of the product unfortunately

LOL! Okay this is my last post before I crawl under my rock. :D That should been "instead of just a great movie to watch". For an HD DVD owner yes that is what it is all about, but for a format that is trying to win a war I don't think that it is. The more people that buy players, the bigger market to sell your movies and the stronger the format. So the greater perceived value, True HD, the greater marketing potential. The greater the marketing, hopefully more people buy players and your movies. I think that a lot of times it is the hype that sells, and not the merit of the product unfortunately

Hey there is a lot of us who don't believe in the Bose argument.

I'd rather have great audio and video instead of great specs and overpriced any day of the week.

This is a very valid point. HD DVD is trying to win a war, but Paramount is not willing to give the best perceived quality in this release. Whether or not someone can actually tell the difference is irrelevant. The problem is with image, and the perceived image is we don't want to give you the best, we want to give you what passes for good enough. That really may not be the case, but that is probably how a lot of customers will perceive it.



Agreed, and well stated.

The number of people who own HD standalone players right now is pretty small -- and still far away from the average consumer just picking one up. With that said, they kind of people who are buying HD media right now are the kind of people who could enjoy lossless audio, if they so chose.

If Paramount were making its business decisions on what to include with its movies based on what most people in the future will be able to play, then why include TrueHD on other movies? Why include online interactive extras, when lots of people don't have broadband, don't have home networks, don't have ethernet jacks near their players, and don't know what a wireless bridge is?

I've never felt the argument that "oh, there isn't a market for lossless audio" to be a particularly good one. Right now, HD media is still a niche market -- and whether Paramount or you or me admit it, its still, by and large, being bought by HT enthusiasts. The same people who MIGHT be swayed by lossless tracks, and who would, no doubt, at least be content with them.

Again, I never said, nor will you hear me say, that without a lossless track, a movie will suck. That's ridiculous. But here are some points of considerations:

1) If there really is no cost in terms of time, money, storage space, or bandwidth, why not include a HQ lossless track?
2) Most people don't even have DVD players hooked up to 5.1 systems -- should we give up on that feature as well? Meaning, why play to the lowest common denominator if you don't have to?
3) Paramount has included lossless tracks on many new releases, including movies that have come out before, on the same day, and after the release of Transformers. Why is it THIS movie they chose not to do so.
4) For those without much knowledge, it will be an easy selling point (though deviously so) in the retail chain -- Person A walks in to Big Electronics Store and asks employee B, "What is TrueHD" -- B replies, "oh, it makes the movies sound better." A replies, "Cool. But why do more movies on that other side have TrueHD than this side." B replies "well....mmmm....that other side has better audio, generally." While obviously fictionalized to the extreme, it's not out of the realm of possibility.

Since so much of these forums are based on nothing more than a few facts and some educated guess / speculation, I find it interesting that there are so many people, now, saying "Oh, I don't care about it and we'll never really know, so forget it." ;)

But archangel and jclark here is the thing. And I keep saying this because sometimes those of us on the AVS Forum think we're the only ones who own HDM players. :)

Other than the 10 people here who complained and claimed "no lossless, no sale", out in the retail world do you think Paramount's decision to do DD+ has had ANY effect on the public sales of the movie? Maybe for the .01% of people that have Dolby TrueHD receivers, maybe. But for everyone else, the answer is no.

We don't know why Paramount didn't do it. We will likely never know unless Dreamworks comes out and says so. Maybe it was cost? Maybe it was because they simply didn't feel the need to deal with the encode if their DD+ encode was easier to work with and gave just as good a sound?

Lack of a lossless track has not stopped reviewers from giving the audio perfect scores. And it hasn't stopped this disc from being #6 on Amazon for the last what, 2 weeks? Nor has it stopped the stories of distributer channel sell-outs and such.

That's a question I'd love to ask FilmMixer when he comes back around.

True, you don't see the people buying SD dvds complaining about lossy encodes -- but what you will find on this forum are plenty of people who, having heard the audio on many HD movies, find it difficult to go back to the audio on SD dvds -- but the real question is, "so what?" -- This is a major aside.

Actually, having read three of the reviews myself, I noticed that while all of them gave glowing reviews of the DD+ track, most noticed the lack of a TrueHD track, wondered why, and some even speculated that it might have sounded better based on their previous experience with DD+ v. TrueHD tracks.

More importantly, I'm not BR fanboy -- just an individual pondering some interesting questions. But yeah, some fanboys would have likely said that even with a TrueHD track, the movie sucked -- and some of those people would have bought it anyway had it come out. The fact is, the movie was far from Lawrence of Arabia -- but that's not the point either. Many people here are buying movies for no other reason than as eye and ear candy, regardless of how bad the movie was (FF:RotSS?!?!?!) Still, even some big, dumb movies can be fun, especially in HD! :cool:

But like I said, I'm no BR fanboy -- I haven't purchased either format yet, and when I do, I'll likely go the dual format route.

My decision on which format to really get behind might be swayed by one format showing its technical limitations already, however -- the best audio and video quality are much more important to me than fancy online extras I won't use. The question then is, is there a possibility that this movie lacks a lossless track because the encoders were worried about losing PQ?

Whether lossless is better than lossy is irrelevant when both formats are supposed to be capable of BOTH "perfect picture and sound."

What really is there to argue about? You dont see the gaggle of people buying the SD DVD complaining about their lossy encodes, do you? Who are the ones arguing though? BR supporters who wont be seeing this released on their format. Independent, separate reviewers have stated the audio is incredible but still those who have NOT even heard the soundtrack are arguing the audio could be better. And even if there was a TrueHD track the arguement would then turn to "the movie was crap, anyway".

This so called "issue" should be looked at closely and be seen for what it really is - the rantings of a few BR supporters unhappy Transformers wont be released on their format. For everyone else who is willing to enjoy a movie for what it is and not stare at bit-rate meters and compare 24bit vs 16 bit there is no issue. Just sit back and enjoy.

Ah. So you're another one of the "I don't own anything, yet I have an opinion on everything" posters. That figures. Come back when you have some actual experience with the technologies being discussed. Until then, enough with the trolling.

Ah, I was waiting for that one --- the classic, "You don't own it, so you can't talk about it" comeback.

If you've been paying attention, which it appears you haven't, you would have noticed that I've never said a disparaging word against DD+ in general or the Transformer's audio track in particular.

But come on, the idea that you have to own a piece of equipment before you have the right to discuss it is plainly ridiculous. And while you can throw around you accusations of trolling all you please, it won't change the fact that I do have on opinion on my ability to ask what I consider interesting questions.

And i add, yet again, this tidbit: even the Hollywood sound designer insider many of you guys hold as your trump card has stated that he wonders why studios don't use lossless tracks more -- if for no other reason that marketing.

In the end, just relax -- everything will be ok! :)

A great encode will never be able to sound just as good as the original.. That is a fact. The original will always sound better in a comparison with the proper equipment. You can argue that 99% of people don't have such an audio system and you would be correct. However this is the audio video science forum and many of us can tell the difference and are enthusiasts.. In this case, the definition of "just as good" differs from yours which is fine.. However what all this boils down to with Transformers is the question "why?" didn't it have a TrueHD track.. It was so they didn't have to dumb down the video any further so that it looks better. The same thing happened with King Kong. I say enough already. This is the "next gen" format, it should have both next gen audio and video along with any extra's.. There is no doubt in my mind had Transformers been released on Blu-Ray, it would easily be able to fit High Def audio and have room for all the extra's that come on the second disc...

The point isn't that HD DVD can't handle a TrueHD track. There is no evidence to suggest why the track wasn't included. Considering there are many titles out there (with longer run times) that do include it and great picture quality it makes you wonder what the real reason is. Regardless, in the end it doesn't matter. It's not there. We have been arguing about it since the beginning of September. Dolby Digital Plus is a high definition audio format, plain and simple. Is lossless better? Of course knowing something is lossess shadows any doubt but the whole purpose of a good encode and a good bit rate is to get as close to lossless as perceptively possible. Why don't people complain about the video encoding. It's not lossless. I thought this was supposed to be high definition - blah blah. Or why is the bit rate capped at 30 MB or 48 MB. Obviously it would look better at 99 MB. No one feels shafted if they get an excellent video presentation regardless of the encoding and bit rate. In the end all we want is a high definition presentation that is exceptional. In the long run, it should matter to no one how that is actually acheived. Next we will all be arguing about which lossless type is better, TrueHD, DTS-MA HD, or PCM. I bet you that has already started somewhere. Meanwhile, no one is actually enjoying the video/sound as it is. To me that's ashame. This is not to say wew should accept poor transfers or encodings, just that if we get a top-notch presentation on the best equipment, why the need to continue to argue about it?

You know, its sad thats its come to this but I wholeheartedly agree, enough with these I've never experienced either format but have an opinion on everything related to them posers er I meant posters. I've owned one of the formats over and year and the other for ten months and can tell you point blank; most of the stuff bantered around by these non-owners is complete bunk.

If you can point to the things that I've said that are "complete bunk" this poser oops, I mean poster, will happily go back and clear up the story.

But I've already answered the "if you don't own it, you have no right to talk about it" argument above. Like I said, I think THAT'S complete bunk -- let me see, you have NEVER had a SINGLE thing to say about something you didn't own or experience? That's impressive. :D

How many great reviews will it take to shut poeple up about the lack of DTHD. The audio is actually outscoring the PQ on most reviews. "Good enough" looks like it is going to sound amazing. If anyone is going to skip this release because of the lack of DTHD then they are either crazy or only own a BD player. I'm saying it right here, right now...this will be the best HD DVD released to date hands down. This is a format seller. I have a friend who is a huge Sony fanboy and even with the lack of lossless on this release he is considering buying an HD DVD player just for Transformers. My point, stop worrying about the specs and just enjoy this release because it is going to be great.

A great encode will never be able to sound just as good as the original.. That is a fact. The original will always sound better in a comparison with the proper equipment. You can argue that 99% of people don't have such an audio system and you would be correct. However this is the audio video science forum and many of us can tell the difference and are enthusiasts.. In this case, the definition of "just as good" differs from yours which is fine.. However what all this boils down to with Transformers is the question "why?" didn't it have a TrueHD track.. It was so they didn't have to dumb down the video any further so that it looks better. The same thing happened with King Kong. I say enough already. This is the "next gen" format, it should have both next gen audio and video along with any extra's.. There is no doubt in my mind had Transformers been released on Blu-Ray, it would easily be able to fit High Def audio and have room for all the extra's that come on the second disc...


Please tell us how you know this as you state it so definitively. Do you work for any of the encoding houses or movie studios?

You'll forgive me if I snip out parts I have no quibbles with. God I hope I don't mangle the HTML.

Re: the double-dipping, I actually think that's a solid theory as to why some movies aren't coming out with lossless tracks now --

Re: FilmMixer, I have no quibbles with what you posted. I would only add that some other studio experts disagree. Nonetheless, I would like to quote what he said recently:

"Quote:
Originally Posted by archangel37
Seriously, why shouldn't studios just provide the lossless track -- woudn't it be a selling point amongst HD media enthusiasts?

Quote:
Originally Posted by jameskollar
If you get a lossless track, fine. But I'm satisfied that a high bitrate lossy track can and does sound as good as a lossless track. If they sound the same, then I would say for all practical pruposes except for bragging rights, they are the same.

These two posts really sum up how I feel... I tend to spend so much time supporting the position that I concur with James on, that my agreement with the point Angel makes gets lost in the sometimes heated debate (even if I don't think that enthusiasts play an important financial role in choosing which format, if any, will be around 5 years from now)..

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=11862593#post11862593

Since we're talking about Paramount, ... I wouldn't be surprised that they release the "Michael Bay's Director's Cut Ultimate Collector Special Edition 'Transformers' HD DVD w/TrueHD" next year or two 2009 - just in time for "Transformers 2" Movie Release!?!?!

Remember, "FilmMixer" (Film Sound and Post Production Insider - Re-Recording Mixer, Hollywood, CA.) AVS Insider is ONE such person that has compared the ...

1) Master
vs.
2) Lossless THD encode
vs.
3) 1.5 DD+ encode

... and based on the above 5-Points, ... Logic dictates that I would certainly take HIS WORDS as verbatim vs. some self-proclaimed audio expert who is nothing more that a HT consumer hobbiest.

He brings out another very good point in an earlier post ...

Phil

How many great reviews will it take to shut poeple up about the lack of DTHD. The audio is actually outscoring the PQ on most reviews. "Good enough" looks like it is going to sound amazing. If anyone is going to skip this release because of the lack of DTHD then they are either crazy or only own a BD player. I'm saying it right here, right now...this will be the best HD DVD released to date hands down. This is a format seller. I have a friend who is a huge Sony fanboy and even with the lack of lossless on this release he is considering buying an HD DVD player just for Transformers. My point, stop worrying about the specs and just enjoy this release because it is going to be great.

Oh, in a sense, I agree -- those people who skip out on this title just because it lacks a lossless tracks seems a bit silly to me. But that's me. And it may be the best HD DVD presentation ever. And it may be a format seller. And I have no doubts at all that it has rocking audio.

None of that changes the fact that IF they could have provided a lossless track, why didn't they?

Hey there is a lot of us who don't believe in the Bose argument.

I'd rather have great audio and video instead of great specs and overpriced any day of the week.

Yeah, that's certainly true -- but it's not like providing a lossless track would have been worse, would it? Or more expensive?

If Paramount were making its business decisions on what to include with its movies based on what most people in the future will be able to play, then why include TrueHD on other movies?
Why include online interactive extras, when lots of people don't have broadband,
don't have home networks,
don't have ethernet jacks near their players,
and don't know what a wireless bridge is?


Here's some other things MOST people Don't Have..
Don't have a receiver....
Don't have a center channel....
Don't have a sub woofer....
Don't have a surround system....
Don't have any way of enjoying ANY high quality sound format, of any kind or brand name.....

Most people who walk into a store arent going to ask about sound formats.......because most of them, have no clue they exist in the first place.......
So when exactly would a customer be asking about TrueHD?
What because its written on the movie box?
When was the last time you saw someone refuse to buy a movie at a B&M store because it Didn't say DTS ES on the box????
When was the last time you saw someone even ask what DTS ES was???
I cant remember a single time that I have seen that happen in any store.....

I think this whole discussion about truehd or dts hd or dts ma is all pretty irrelevent.
The ONLY people any of it matters to, are people who own a receiver that can actually decode them.
Otherwise the PLAYER is doing the decoding anyway.....and you are NOT getting lossless sound.....

Remember, "FilmMixer" (Film Sound and Post Production Insider - Re-Recording Mixer, Hollywood, CA.) AVS Insider is ONE such person that has compared the ...

1) Master
vs.
2) Lossless THD encode
vs.
3) 1.5 DD+ encode

Excellent post. I might have quoted those links myself if I had the energy, but I'm weary of trying to reason with those whose minds are ROM. I fear the response will be:

"ya but lossless is always better its got more bitrate i dont own it yet but thats what the guy in best buy told me"

I agree with the last post but I would like to add something else. I would almost bet that if we did a hearing test on many who are making the argument we would find that many had some loss of hearing. I would also suggest that someone offer free hearing tests and than do double blind testing at the same volume of each audio format with a disk that includes them.

You'll forgive me if I snip out parts I have no quibbles with. God I hope I don't mangle the HTML.

Re: the double-dipping, I actually think that's a solid theory as to why some movies aren't coming out with lossless tracks now --



WRT Transformers I would disagree. Apart from a TrueHD track how much more could be added to the HD DVD release to make it worth double-dipping? There are already 2 discs packed with extras with Web functionality to download even more. Apart from AVS forumers who would be attracted by a lossless track who would they be trying to appeal to with another release? Unless there is an extended directors cut with even more extras (TL51 maybe?) I think a Transformers re-release is unlikely. J6P certainly wont be rushing out to rebuy it just for another soundtrack when the current one sounds, by all accounts, fantastic.

Yeah, that's certainly true -- but it's not like providing a lossless track would have been worse, would it? Or more expensive?

Haven't you heard the old saying, Time equals money?
If it takes ANY time at all, especially considering the salaries of all the people involved, the answer is:
YES, it would cost more.

Paramount is the only company that can answer any of these questions. So if you really want to know why its not on the disc, send them an e-mail. Speculating on a message board isn't going to get this question answered.

A great encode will never be able to sound just as good as the original.. That is a fact. The original will always sound better in a comparison with the proper equipment. You can argue that 99% of people don't have such an audio system and you would be correct. However this is the audio video science forum and many of us can tell the difference and are enthusiasts.. In this case, the definition of "just as good" differs from yours which is fine.. However what all this boils down to with Transformers is the question "why?" didn't it have a TrueHD track.. It was so they didn't have to dumb down the video any further so that it looks better. The same thing happened with King Kong. I say enough already. This is the "next gen" format, it should have both next gen audio and video along with any extra's.. There is no doubt in my mind had Transformers been released on Blu-Ray, it would easily be able to fit High Def audio and have room for all the extra's that come on the second disc...

Just like Pirates of the Caribbean movies fit on 1 disc?
Just like Spiderman 3 fit on 1 disc?
How many Paramount titles had lossless audio vs. HD DVD?

Hi everyone,

Here's a quick breakdown of my system:

Pioneer Elite 1140HD 50" ISF calibrated (accepts 1080/24 native res is 720p)

Toshiba A-30/Sony BDP-300

Integra DTR-6.6 Receiver

KEF ACE6000 x6

DefTech Supercube sub

I'm the farthest thing from a professional reviewer, but i do work in the industry and considered to have a 'trained' eye. I'm doing this quick review for the fans of HD technology and hope it gets you even more excited for the 16th.

PQ - 5/5: This is a beautiful looking film. Yes, I do agree with other reviewers that the whites in certain scenes are blown out (artisitc intent) and do 'flatten' the image somewhat, but that's only because the rest of the disc has such a wonderful sense of depth. The black levels are dead on, the colors are saturated without even the hint of bleeding (very Michael Bay) and the level of detail is amazing. Just looking at the detail on the bots (especially Prime) is jaw-dropping material. There is apparant grain in certain exterior low light conditions and certain long shots of the A-10s and other craft. It does not distract and gives the presentation an even more film-like apperance. I am format neutral and have seen some incredible HD and Blu discs (POTC 2/FF2/Hot Fuzz/The Island -import-/Riddick come to mind) and i have to say i consider TRANSFORMERS to be a Tier 0 disc. It's just that good. I just have to beat the dead horse again and say that this is such a great film-like presentation

AQ - 5/5 This is one hell of a mix. Yes, the surrounds aren't as active as say SAVING RYAN SD or any other Gary Rystrom mix, but when they are used, they are full range, baby. The system got one HELL of a workout. The sequence at the start at the millitary base with the helicopter/decepticon battle is aural orgasmic. The shock wave blast sounds go wayyy deep on the 20hz range. I was very, very impressed with the DD+ presentation. I cannot comment on the DD+/TRUEHD/DTS-MA arguements as my receiver cannot decode those lossless codecs at this time. I have listened to master recordings (part of my job description) and can say that TRANSFORMERS DD+ didn't dissapoint. I would love to evenutally hear an a/b comparison between TRANSFORMERS DD+ and a DTS-MA or TRUE HD mix, but i'm not holding my breath.

Well, i'm sure everyone is excitied to get this disc and i can say with confidence that everyone shall be enthralled.

I've taken a few screenshots with a digital SLR, for your viewing pleasure. The shots aren't very good but at least you're getting a glimpse.

Hope everyone has a wonderful weekend and thanks for reading.

Best,

Paul

http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/5231/img3260customqd8.jpg

http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/3204/img3265customhg4.jpg

http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/4197/img3267customjn9.jpg

http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/5594/img3270customyc5.jpg

Nice! Thanks for the pics. :D

1) If there really is no cost in terms of time, money, storage space, or bandwidth, why not include a HQ lossless track?

That right there is the right question, and I bolded what the real reasons could be. If the encode, and I keep using IF, is more involved and time consuming to do TrueHD, and the DD+ sounds pretty much the same; then why invest the time or cost into it when you could spend that time working on the second disc of HD extras, or the "IME" type stuff that I think would be more important?


2) Most people don't even have DVD players hooked up to 5.1 systems -- should we give up on that feature as well? Meaning, why play to the lowest common denominator if you don't have to?

That's sort of a false premise. The Dolby Digital "AC-3 core" is a minimum requirement of all HD DVD's. TrueHD is mandatory as a codec, but not a requirement of any and all HD DVD's.


3) Paramount has included lossless tracks on many new releases, including movies that have come out before, on the same day, and after the release of Transformers. Why is it THIS movie they chose not to do so.


There is something else that was brough up in Josh Z's HDD article on HD audio. Did you know that because not all devices output TrueHD in full 5.1 (the LG BH100. the Xbox 360 will decode it, but output it as DD or DTS 1.5), it is mandatory that the disc also include a DD or DD+ track?

http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/show/Joshua_Zyber/High-Def_FAQ:_Blu-ray_and_HD_DVD_Audio_Explained/1064

So now you're doing 2 audio encodes for the movie instead of one. So again, if the DD+ encode sounds as good as people are saying it does, why waste the time on a TrueHD encode when you can call audio a done deal and move on to the interactive stuff? Or go back and make sure the PQ is up to snuff?


4) For those without much knowledge, it will be an easy selling point (though deviously so) in the retail chain -- Person A walks in to Big Electronics Store and asks employee B, "What is TrueHD" -- B replies, "oh, it makes the movies sound better." A replies, "Cool. But why do more movies on that other side have TrueHD than this side." B replies "well....mmmm....that other side has better audio, generally." While obviously fictionalized to the extreme, it's not out of the realm of possibility.

I hate to tell you, but even Best Buy employees in the Magnolia center don't know what TrueHD is. I have asked at several stores, and some folks can't even point me to a TrueHD receiver because they don't really know what the codec is other than to say "Well, it's an enhancement on DVD sound".

I think among the masses, this is simply a non-issue right now. When the time comes that Paramount feels TrueHD needs to be on every disc, I'm sure they'll include it.

Nice! Thanks for the pics. :D

...especially another one of Megan Fox. Is there a car in the picture? I didn't notice.

Actually, this backs up my point -- there are plenty of things that MOST people don't have -- including the ability to fully enjoy the DD+ track on this movie.

But of course, you're right -- the average consumer won't care about one bit about lossless v. lossy. But the fact remains, the average consumer isn't buying HD media in the first place. What's most likely happening is this:

Shopper A walks into Wal-mart -- sees the displays for HD DVD Transformers, and sees the price: $25 (more or less) -- then sees the price for the normal Transformers: 19.99 or less -- and then is told that to enjoy that HD DVD, he'll have to fork over another $250-300, at the least, for a new player. No thanks, says Shopper A -- I'll stick with my SD DVD and SRS stereo audio!

But what you're telling me is that my question on why Paramount chose to not include a lossless track is irrelevant because of Shopper A?

Here's some other things MOST people Don't Have..
Don't have a receiver....
Don't have a center channel....
Don't have a sub woofer....
Don't have a surround system....
Don't have any way of enjoying ANY high quality sound format, of any kind or brand name.....

Most people who walk into a store arent going to ask about sound formats.......because most of them, have no clue they exist in the first place.......
So when exactly would a customer be asking about TrueHD?
What because its written on the movie box?
When was the last time you saw someone refuse to buy a movie at a B&M store because it Didn't say DTS ES on the box????
When was the last time you saw someone even ask what DTS ES was???
I cant remember a single time that I have seen that happen in any store.....

I think this whole discussion about truehd or dts hd or dts ma is all pretty irrelevent.
The ONLY people any of it matters to, are people who own a receiver that can actually decode them.
Otherwise the PLAYER is doing the decoding anyway.....and you are NOT getting lossless sound.....

Great review. Thanks for the info and the screenshots. Hope this thread doesn't turn into one of the other two threads and we can keep this to a simply positive thread since there seems to be nothing negative about this release.

If you get a chance, can you check out the special features and give us an update?

Great review.

There's a lot here I agree with -- really, one of the best posts on this subject so far.

First, if the reason Paramount chose not to include TrueHD was because on significant time/money additions, I would better understand. But they've chosen to include TrueHD on a lot of tracks -- and hell, if any movie could have recouped the extra costs in using TrueHD, Transformers would have been it -- certainly more so than A Mighty Wind! ;)

I think you slightly misunderstood my point on 5.1 argument -- what people have been arguing here is that because most people can't take advantage of TrueHD, it doesn't matter. What I'm saying is that most people also can't take advantage of 5.1 audio -- should that not matter as well? Certainly it would be cheaper to do a simple stereo or mono encode, no? (ha).

My understanding is that HD DVD is more than capable of a lossless track and HQ video at the same time without sweating the details -- that not true? Again, if Paramount is worried about costs and time, why would they ever use TrueHD right now?

My point of that retail example was precisely to point out what you've said -- that even retail people don't know what TrueHD is. And how in the wrong hands, that can be a selling point for Blu-ray -- "MMmmm.....yeah, Blu-ray movies have more TrueHD/lossless tracks than HD DVD because BR has better audio. mmm...yeah." Not an unlikely statement from a clueless salesperson, unfortunately!

Among the masses, HD Media in general is a non-issue -- I don't think that's a reason to ignore it!

That right there is the right question, and I bolded what the real reasons could be. If the encode, and I keep using IF, is more involved and time consuming to do TrueHD, and the DD+ sounds pretty much the same; then why invest the time or cost into it when you could spend that time working on the second disc of HD extras, or the "IME" type stuff that I think would be more important?




That's sort of a false premise. The Dolby Digital "AC-3 core" is a minimum requirement of all HD DVD's. TrueHD is mandatory as a codec, but not a requirement of any and all HD DVD's.





There is something else that was brough up in Josh Z's HDD article on HD audio. Did you know that because not all devices output TrueHD in full 5.1 (the LG BH100. the Xbox 360 will decode it, but output it as DD or DTS 1.5), it is mandatory that the disc also include a DD or DD+ track?

http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/show/Joshua_Zyber/High-Def_FAQ:_Blu-ray_and_HD_DVD_Audio_Explained/1064

So now you're doing 2 audio encodes for the movie instead of one. So again, if the DD+ encode sounds as good as people are saying it does, why waste the time on a TrueHD encode when you can call audio a done deal and move on to the interactive stuff? Or go back and make sure the PQ is up to snuff?




I hate to tell you, but even Best Buy employees in the Magnolia center don't know what TrueHD is. I have asked at several stores, and some folks can't even point me to a TrueHD receiver because they don't really know what the codec is other than to say "Well, it's an enhancement on DVD sound".

I think among the masses, this is simply a non-issue right now. When the time comes that Paramount feels TrueHD needs to be on every disc, I'm sure they'll include it.

Ah, I was waiting for that one --- the classic, "You don't own it, so you can't talk about it" comeback.

If you've been paying attention, which it appears you haven't, you would have noticed that I've never said a disparaging word against DD+ in general or the Transformer's audio track in particular.

But come on, the idea that you have to own a piece of equipment before you have the right to discuss it is plainly ridiculous. And while you can throw around you accusations of trolling all you please, it won't change the fact that I do have on opinion on my ability to ask what I consider interesting questions.

And i add, yet again, this tidbit: even the Hollywood sound designer insider many of you guys hold as your trump card has stated that he wonders why studios don't use lossless tracks more -- if for no other reason that marketing.

In the end, just relax -- everything will be ok! :)
You've made well over ten posts in this thread, with the majority amounting to nothing more than "why didn't they include DTHD?"

And yes, to an extent, I think that you have to have real-world experience with the technologies being discussed before you can comment intelligently on the subject. Without a frame of reference, all you can really do is regurgitate the same talking points that have been repeated ad nauseam. How can you possibly have an opinion on high bitrate lossy vs lossless codecs when you haven't heard them?

BTW - I find it more than a little odd that you've posted more in this thread than anyone else (16 times so far, with the next highest being Dave Vaughn with 9.)

Shopper A walks into Wal-mart -- sees the displays for HD DVD Transformers, and sees the price: $25 (more or less) -- then sees the price for the normal Transformers: 19.99 or less -- and then is told that to enjoy that HD DVD, he'll have to fork over another $250-300, at the least, for a new player. No thanks, says Shopper A -- I'll stick with my SD DVD and SRS stereo audio!

But what you're telling me is that my question on why Paramount chose to not include a lossless track is irrelevant because of Shopper A?

According your own example...shopper A refused to buy an HD DVD because of the COST involved, not because of the SOUND format........

So YES, even in your own example, Paramounts decision to not include TrueHD is, in fact, Irrelevant....

My last post before I go hide under my rock again. All I am trying to say is that the HD DVD group could get more BD supporters interested if they gave similar specs for movies. Again, there may not be any real benefit to the addition, but the people that are concerned about HD DVD limitation would be shown that there is no reason. I think that it would have been a huge blow in favor of HD DVD instead of a great movie to enjoy. I kind of thinking along the lines of long term benefits instead of just selling a movie.

I will shut up now. :)

i dont think the bd supporters on this board are anti hd dvd because of the specs, the same way hd dvd supporters chose their side because of....whatever. its pretty much fanboys being fanboys. bd has plusses and minuses just like hd has plus and minuses. only the format cheerleaders cant see that

Blu-Boys out in force today

"WAHHH WAHHHHHHHHHHH WE DIDN'T GET TRANSFORMERS BUT HD DVD OWNERS ARE!! WAHH WAHHHHHHHHH!!! Wait they get DD+ 1.5 mbps! SUCKERS!!!!! WHEN I BUY THE DVD VERSION I'LL HAVE DD 448 kbps!!!!!!!!! BLAHHH!!!"

Paramount left, get over it.

I am kinda concerned with this review on Video 8/10, some other reviews say it's a Perfect 10, and this only gave a 8?

Watched some of the 2nd disc. All in HD. Nice little docs about the history, then Michael Bay, then training, using real SeALs, etc. Haven't watched the post production docs as of yet nor used the H.U.D thing. Well done.

You've made well over ten posts in this thread, with the majority amounting to nothing more than "why didn't they include DTHD?"

And yes, to an extent, I think that you have to have real-world experience with the technologies being discussed before you can comment intelligently on the subject. Without a frame of reference, all you can really do is regurgitate the same talking points that have been repeated ad nauseam. How can you possibly have an opinion on high bitrate lossy vs lossless codecs when you haven't heard them?

BTW - I find it more than a little odd that you've posted more in this thread than anyone else (16 times so far, with the next highest being Dave Vaughn with 9.)

Amen!

Yes, I do agree with other reviewers that the whites in certain scenes are blown out (artisitc intent) and do 'flatten' the image somewhat, but that's only because the rest of the disc has such a wonderful sense of depth. The black levels are dead on, the colors are saturated without even the hint of bleeding (very Michael Bay) and the level of detail is amazing.

Sounds like the same thing that he did with The Island. I never got the chance to see this at the theater, so I am really looking forward to getting my copy from Amazon soon.

Nice work, thanks for taking the time out!

BTW - I find it more than a little odd that you've posted more in this thread than anyone else (16 times so far, with the next highest being Dave Vaughn with 9.)

I find it a little odd that you bothered to check that. Oh well, if you can't make a valid argument I guess attacking the poster will just have to do...

For all those who still haven't gotten over Paramount/Dreamworks dumping Bluray - the "professional" reviews of Transformers are now coming out.

And the "professional" reviews are giving 5/5 for Video and 5/5 for Audio. This is apparently one of the BEST soundtracks to have yet hit HDM discs of either format. Seems to show that 1.5 mbps DD+ is up to the task just fine.

You've made well over ten posts in this thread, with the majority amounting to nothing more than "why didn't they include DTHD?"

And yes, to an extent, I think that you have to have real-world experience with the technologies being discussed before you can comment intelligently on the subject. Without a frame of reference, all you can really do is regurgitate the same talking points that have been repeated ad nauseam. How can you possibly have an opinion on high bitrate lossy vs lossless codecs when you haven't heard them?

BTW - I find it more than a little odd that you've posted more in this thread than anyone else (16 times so far, with the next highest being Dave Vaughn with 9.)

I think that Archangle and I were arguing the same point, and I think that you misunderstand us. We were just wondering if including Lossless on Transformers would have been good strategic move for the HD DVD format. This was probably not the best thread for this discussion as it is not really on topic. I apologize for derailing the thread.

Too bad you've never actually seen the quality of the HD DVD add-on. I assure you that you don't know what you're talking about. :)

Especially when you get it for $179 and what now 5 free movies? That's a steal.

I second that and I have seen it as low as $159 on sale.

Can't wait for this one... This is really the first title I am completely excited for, if anything for just an amazing demo disc.

Saw the film in the theater, I dislike Bay but I knew that going... this movie is just a blast and that is why I love it!!!

I find it a little odd that you bothered to check that. Oh well, if you can't make a valid argument I guess attacking the poster will just have to do...

Valid arguments were made repeatedly. The responses were rote and repetitive to the extreme. I found Steeb's comments perfectly reasonable.

Valid arguments were made repeatedly. The responses were rote and repetitive to the extreme. I found Steeb's comments perfectly reasonable.

Which argument made so far is valid?
1) There's no difference between 24 bit lossy and 24 bit lossless.
2) Get out of here Blu-ray fan boy!
3) You're just jealous!
4) You don't even own an HDM player so you can't have an opinion!
5) Most people can't hear the difference anyway!
6) Most people can't decode lossless anyway!
7) Sounds better than the blu-ray release!
8) Look at that dead bird flyin!

Which argument made so far is valid?
1) There's no difference between 24 bit lossy and 24 bit lossless.
2) Get out of here Blu-ray fan boy!
3) You're just jealous!
4) You don't even own an HDM player so you can't have an opinion!
5) Most people can't hear the difference anyway!
6) Most people can't decode lossless anyway!
7) Sounds better than the blu-ray release!
8) Look at that dead bird flyin!

Just glancing over them, 7 for sure.

I am kinda concerned with this review on Video 8/10, some other reviews say it's a Perfect 10, and this only gave a 8?

Different set of eye balls.

Got my copy of Transformers 4:pm this afternoon, but tonight is couple's night out so the grand viewing will have to wait until I get home.

Blaspheme, I know, I know.......

(Shed no tears for the invisible BRD edition that might have been;))

Looks like Transformers rocks!!! BD boys better go buy HD DVD players.

http://www.tvpredictions.com/2007/10/hd-dvd-review-transformers.html

TVPredictions just awarded the HD DVD a perfect 5/5 PQ and 5/5 AQ as well.:D

I'm noticing a theme here with the reviews for both the HD and SD releases... ;)

posts deleted: you guys should know better :(

Can we please combine all the transformers threads? I know we're all excited about this title, but 8 threads on the front page (6 of the top 12 threads) is a little excessive.

A great encode will never be able to sound just as good as the original.. That is a fact. The original will always sound better in a comparison with the proper equipment.


That's just not true. "Never" is just false. As is "always". Talk to any honest sound engineer and they will tell you the same. Of course it's "always" best to avoid compression when you can - that does not mean it will "always" sound inferior. and yes I am a sound engineer. But I don't think all the experts/insiders in the world would stop someone from believing what they want to.

I find it a little odd that you bothered to check that. Oh well, if you can't make a valid argument I guess attacking the poster will just have to do...
You do know that the forum software keeps track of it, right? All I had to do was click on this link (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/misc.php?do=whoposted&t=921727) to get the numbers. It's not like I went through the thread, counting posts.

As for "valid arguments," plenty have been made, but they tend to fall on deaf ears.

Can we please combine all the transformers threads? I know we're all excited about this title, but 8 threads on the front page (6 of the top 12 threads) is a little excessive.

I think one of the reasons there are so many threads is because everyone is still in shock that a lossy track can get a perfect score

I just ordered mine about 30 minutes ago. I cannot wait for this thing to get here.

Yes, we love Transformers :D

http://www.megansafox.com/gallery/albums/fhm/megan_fox_fhm_november_3.jpg

"THE AUDIO: 5 stars out of 5

Simply put, this is one of the best sounding discs I have ever heard. There were a lot of complaints when the specs for this disc were announced in August and did not included a Dolby True HD track. How could this title be released with only a Dolby Digital Plus track was the cry. It shows the lack of capacity of HD-DVD discs was the complaint. Not to worry. It turns out that all those complaints were unfounded. The Dolby Digital Plus track is outstanding. The sound on this disc is smooth and totally dynamic. The dialogue is full, rich and clear. The voice of Optimus Prime in the narration is totally lifelike. The sound field is totally immersive. Despite all the explosions and action, one never has any problem hearing the dialogue. The bass is incredible, among the best I have heard on disc. It is deep, taut and powerful. The surrounds are constantly in action. The battle scenes are fantastic with objects whizzing all around you constantly. I can't imagine how this disc could have sounded any better with True HD. I guess we may never know but after hearing this disc, I was certainly not longing to find out. The audio is that good. This is reference audio folks."

So..how many rave reviews will the lossy audio track on this film get before lossless zealots realize that the fact that this title has no lossless audio is irrelevant?

Can we please combine all the transformers threads? I know we're all excited about this title, but 8 threads on the front page (6 of the top 12 threads) is a little excessive.

Excessive to who?

So..how many rave reviews will the lossy audio track on this film get before lossless zealots realize that the fact that this title has no lossless audio is irrelevant?

I know I for one can't wait until the studios decide to stop releasing lossless tracks altogether. Why even waste the space when there's no difference?

I know I for one can't wait until the studios decide to stop releasing lossless tracks altogether. Why even waste the space when there's no difference?

Don't worry about it until you take the red pill.

On the blue side, many standalone Blu-Ray players can not decode advance HD audio format hence the studios will always have to include PCM tracks or DD. Just enjoy what you can with what you have.

http://www.tvpredictions.com/2007/10/hd-dvd-review-transformers.html

TVPredictions just awarded the HD DVD a perfect 5/5 PQ and 5/5 AQ as well.:D

This is JWhips' review, it probably went online on his blog first than on tvpredictions, not that I'm complaining at all :p

I know I for one can't wait until the studios decide to stop releasing lossless tracks altogether. Why even waste the space when there's no difference?

I say quite encoding the video in HD and quite wasting that space since there is no deference.:rolleyes:

I can't wait to get my copy.

I say quite encoding the video in HD and quite wasting that space since there is no deference.:rolleyes:

There is no reason using disc space up if the audio and/or video is already transparent to the original imo.

TrueHD goes to 11, everyone knows this.

I thought I read that there were some deleted scenes on the HD DVD but no review has mentioned them?

Can we please combine all the transformers threads? I know we're all excited about this title, but 8 threads on the front page (6 of the top 12 threads) is a little excessive.

We are? :D

I thought you were pro Blu???:D

Wow. Posts like this are what make me love this community. I learn something new every day.

Keep talking like that and one of the elders will take you behind the velvet curtain.

This HD DVD ROCKS, and hard at that. I need more power and subs to really enjoy it. I think i killed my little Velodyne DPS10 during the Ironhide slo-mo 'flip' scene. Thats got to be 20hz or less. I love it.

Don't worry about it until you take the red pill.

I have an HD-DVD player thanks.

On the blue side, many standalone Blu-Ray players can not decode advance HD audio format hence the studios will always have to include PCM tracks or DD. Just enjoy what you can with what you have.

You should really go to another forum if you wish to discuss blu-ray.

It does look damn near as good as that pic of Meagan above. On my measley 42" screen, it DOES look that good! This has to be a reference disc on PQ and AQ.

Too bad you've never actually seen the quality of the HD DVD add-on. I assure you that you don't know what you're talking about. :)

Especially when you get it for $179 and what now 5 free movies? That's a steal.

Have you seen that new dual format HDDVD/BD LG drive coming out? Really nice price on that too.

Do you have this title yet? did you review it? if not your opinion on a audio track you haven't heard isn't warranted or wanted even. I agree with the fact that a dd+ track should not get a 10 as a lossless track must be better to some degree even if it is marginal and reviewing a hi def disc w/o lossless and giving it a perfect score only implies that the reviewer does not care if he gets a lossless track or not.

EXACTLY! Great post!

You just proved 2 points at once with this question you asked here.

The reviewer should only care how it sounded right? :D

This is why all of the uproar over the Dolby Digital Plus only track on Transformers is just crazy.

Do you have this title yet? did you review it? if not your opinion on a audio track you haven't heard isn't warranted or wanted even

So why are the Bluboys ranting about the lack of a lossless track without even hearing how the Dolby Digital Plus track sounds at 1.5Mbps? :cool:

Too bad you've never actually seen the quality of the HD DVD add-on. I assure you that you don't know what you're talking about. :)

Especially when you get it for $179 and what now 5 free movies? That's a steal.

don't forget isn't King Kong packaged inside as a free gift? So that's six movies.;)

A great encode will never be able to sound just as good as the original.. That is a fact. The original will always sound better in a comparison with the proper equipment. You can argue that 99% of people don't have such an audio system and you would be correct. However this is the audio video science forum and many of us can tell the difference and are enthusiasts..

If the encode isn't screwed, the 'proper equipment' would be a measuring device capable of discerning differences more minute than any human possibly could.

I suppose your eyes are also good enough to divide the color spectrum into 16,000,000 levels and spot the difference between the top 2 shades of red?

Maybe you can also see the microscopic pits that exist on a brand new razor blade with your naked eye?

I bet anything I could send you a set of test tones in any given frequency range that are within a few cycles of one another, and you would not be able to tell them apart, or tell me which one was higher or lower in pitch.

Give it a rest, please.

It's obvious that you only want to be told that you are getting better audio or video performance, even though you can't come close to telling the difference.

I found an easter egg. At the end of the film, after the Paramount logo, you're brought to a menu screen. Choices are:

IRON MAN trailer in HD 5.1

TRANSFORMERS teaser trailer

TRANSFORMERS Roll Out (rock music with autobots montage sequences from the film). At the end it says, see more exclusive stuff at www.autobotsrollout.com which shows you the same video

There ya go.

A review is up on my sie as well. To those who complain about no True HD, you must check out this disc. No complaints here!

I believe you too Joe! Bcause of what Paramont did to Mission Impossible 3. That also had the same specs and that was pure reference quality:)

So..how many rave reviews will the lossy audio track on this film get before lossless zealots realize that the fact that this title has no lossless audio is irrelevant?

It doesn't matter how many rave reviews, or even if they hear it for themselves. The sort of people that make these complaints incessantly have it in their nature to piss and moan about something, always.

Rather than trying to get them to grow a brain, I suggest everyone else simply ignore them. Without attention, these types usually go away.

I assume you have an xbox 360, so I believe they would want to release Transformers on the Marketplace, you could spend a few bucks on the HD download, yeah it won't look as good as the HD DVD but you still get to watch Transformers in HD

Nope, I don't have the xbox360 yet. Planning to get it in a couple of months too. The reason why I won't get the hd dvd add on is cause 1) Where I'm at, only king kong comes free with the add-on 2) I've a reciever capable of hd audio, why should I be stuck with what the add-on has? Cause personally I feel that high def is not just about video but audio as well, I don't want to get cheated of the other half of the experience. (No offence to the add-on users! :x)

Looks like Transformers rocks!!! BD boys better go buy HD DVD players.

Yep it does rock and I will be buying it. However BD boys right now are too busy with Fry's $10 sale and the upcoming Disney's buy one get one free deal (check out Blu-ray software thread). As I have bought some of these $10 Fry's BD discs.

By the way Transformers HD disc is going to be $27.99 as compared to most other places that have priced it at $29.99.

Does it have a slipcover over it?

http://highdefdiscnews.com/reviews/transformers/transformers_HD_cover_full.jpg

Yep it does rock and I will be buying it. However BD boys right now are too busy with Fry's $10 sale and the upcoming Disney's buy one get one free deal (check out Blu-ray software thread). As I have bought some of these $10 Fry's BD discs.
To be frank, the majority of the Fry $10 titles are Sony titles that many people already have and many of them have been through cheapish sales off and on recently (quite a few I already grabbed for $15). In the Disney deal, I was going to grab The Lookout and The Prestige, but for the same amount I can get Transformers. I'll be picking the latter.

Hell, my most anticipated upcoming BD title is AC/DC - Live at Donington, though I'm not normal... :p

Yes a plastic translucent slipcover.

Yes a plastic translucent slipcover.

Nice! This is the second HD DVD with one then, right (40YO Virgin being the first...Not counting those Brazil/Australia doc. discs).

I cant wait for this flick. Tuesday couldnt come soon enough

http://www.superheroflix.com/news/38/23538.php

Peter Cullen Confirms Transformers 2 During HD-DVD Presentation

Source: B. Alan Orange
Friday, October 12th, 2007
...Until today, I had yet to see an HD-DVD presentation of any kind. I wasn't really interested in the upgrade of software, mainly because I have a garage full of DVDs that will soon be obsolete. I was invited down to Paramount Studios today to check out their latest disc for Transformers. The representatives on hand were quick to point out that this was the "Most robust, fully realized version of an HD disc ever released."

I yawned. Of course it was. Right? I've been disappointed in just about every technical advance in home entertainment since the Star Wars DVDs came out. I don't know why, but with those discs, I thought **** was going to come flying out of my screen. That I was going to be magically transported directly into those mythical worlds I'd known since I was a kid. Sadly, that didn't happen. It was just like watching Star Wars on any regular old TV. And, in fact, the picture looked better coming off my tube television. I was disappointed to say the least. So, when I heard they were going to be showing Transformers to me on HD-DVD, I tossed the thought off as another choir.

Then they showed me that scene where the Scorponock, or whatever the Hell its called, comes out of the sand and hassles Josh Duhamel and Tyrese Gibson. It wasn't biblical, by any means. But damn, it was gorgeous. The colors were sharp, the infinite detail of the picture sent me into a euphoric state. Best of all, you could see the extreme amount of detail that went into every single piece of that robot. They also showed us other scenes, and that's all I could focus on. How well each working part of these robots fit together. It was all accounted for in extreme authenticity. My AOD (attention overcompensation disorder) kicked in, and I had this horrible urge to crawl up into the screen and wipe the dust from Optimus Prime's helmet.

But it was a ruse. A trick. A mean little game of consumer extortion. Why? Because this thing looked so awesome, I just have to have it right now! And that' an impossibility. To get the kind of clarity I was being shown, I'd have to purchase an HD TV, and an HD-DVD player, a theater-worthy sound system, and a concession stand for all of my friends who'd surely be at my house every evening to watch this incredible thing over an over again. I don't have that kind of money.

Maybe, hopefully, the robot army is planning an up rise. If I keep thinking that way, it will urge my hand into my wallet. Black plastic. That will fuel this sudden fire that Paramount has ignited in my heart. Credit is something I won't have to pay back if Megatron destroys most of the planet. Maybe I can convince the big lug to leave my apartment alone. I'll just sit in my half-destroyed hovel, watching the film over and over again.

The crazy thing about the two-disc set is the amount of DVD features it contains. This is a twenty-four hour ordeal wrapped in a shell of plastic. There are so many special and interactive features crammed into this HD-DVD, you won't be coming out of your room for a good week or two. The first disc alone has over eight hours of information on it. You have the entire movie itself. Which I wasn't a huge fan of. I thought it was all right. Fun. Exciting. But the second time I watched it, it just seemed like a lot of noise. Seeing it here, in HD-DVD, I'm going to have to rethink my critique of the film. It is a marvelous wonder of technology. And the High Definition really shows that off. I literally could sit and stare at this movie in complete amazement for a good seven days straight.

The disc contains a very intense, funny, and informative commentary by Michael Bay, the director of the film. The scene we watched had Shai LaBeouf being chased by real trained police dogs. Bay goes into this exciting story about how the dogs got away from their trainer, and actually almost killed LaBeouf. His way with words boosts the intensity of this scene as it is being shown on screen. There's a function that allows a little box to appear in the far left corner, and it shows Shia doing his own stunts. Falling and hurting himself. Jumping on these two barrels to keep from getting mauled to death. The look of fear on Shia's face is authentic, were are told, "This was the first night of shooting, and we almost lost our lead. He almost died that night. No joke. We knew something bad was up when the dog trainer said, "Uh-oh". Luckily for us, Shia is a fast runner."

One of the coolest features on the first disc is a grid function that has a GPS screen on it. It shows you were the characters are in terms of geographical location. It's this little map of the world, and we learn that the characters are in Los Angeles. Off to the side of this robotic looking piece of software is a character grid that has energy level bars for each Autobot or Deception being shown on screen. When they get hit or injured during the course of the film, the bar gets dimmer and dimmer. If they die, their character picture goes black. Its extinguished.

They are also working with a lot of Wed-based special features that will download themselves once you are logged into the Transformers database. When this disc streets on Tuesday, you will be able to download a new special feature every day for the next six days. There are also five Easter eggs hidden on the disc. One of them is an HD trailer for John Favreau's Iron Man. Another is an incredibly funny blooper featuring Michael Bay. The representatives on hand refused to clue us in as to where these Easter eggs could be found.

The second disc was your standard issue extra features disc, albeit with a High Def twist. The specials are split into three camps: Our World, Their War, and then a set of extras that are web based. We get an extensive look at the creators behind the film, the fandom that ensued, a look at Botcon, and an extensive biography on the Hasbro cartoon and toy line. Sadly, there are no bloopers. But if you are a true Transformers fan, you can't go wrong with this package. Everything you could possibly want to know about the franchise is accounted for here. And if its not, it will be downloaded to the disc soon enough.

You can register your disc and receive up-dates as to any new news on the Transformers 2 front. The cool thing about this is, even if you register your disc, they will not be able to tell that you stole it. So, seeing as how most of my readers don't have the cash to delve too deeply into this gorgeous looking Transformers package, they won't be able to track you down if you steal it and all of the expensive equipment that goes along with it. Trust me, I asked. With all of this web-enabled server equipment, I found it interesting that the government could possible track you with the use of this DVD. But Paramount assured me the disc wouldn't be used for individual profiling. And that all of the information is volunteered by the consumer.

Yeah, right.

After the presentation, I got to sit down with Peter Cullen, the voice of Optimus Prime, and have some Prime Rib. As it was an informal setting, I didn't record the conversation. But about a Transformers 2, he says he has signed on to it and a possible third entry. But that he can't offer any other information than that. He also said that he didn't record any new voice-overs for the DVD itself. Everything you hear on the menu and the grids is taken from the movie. He then started telling me about the motor home he just bought, and how he has decked it out with an HD-DVD system and TV screen. I asked him if he ever makes up voices for his vehicles, especially this new RV. He laughed, assuring everyone at the table that it was the best question he'd gotten in a long time, "Yeah, I guess I do that. I did give my new RV a voice."

"Do you ever have private conversations with it?"

"Yeah, I do. That is so funny." And he laughed. Then we continued eating Prime Rib. After lunch they gave me a life-sized Allspark box. I had to drive it home on my Vespa, and suddenly, I felt like I was in the movie itself. It was then, zipping through Hollywood traffic, that I decided not to waist the money on an HD-DVD player and plasma screen just yet. Whenever I feel that Transformers Jones coming over me, all I have to do is grab my Allspark and jump on the back of my scooter.

Then I opened the box. Inside was an HD-DVD of "Transformer". Damn, now I will be spending the rest of the evening looking for a High Def bargain. Those suckabitches got me!

If you have the means, indulge in this disc. You wont be disappointed. And that's the B. Alan guarantee.

There is no reason using disc space up if the audio and/or video is already transparent to the original imo.

Transparent to whom is a relative term at best. The same argument is made by J6P about the video of HD-DVD/BD compared to DVD on his HDTV. "It looks about the same to me so why do I need HD-DVD/BD?" If you have a lossless audio track (same master) to directly compare to the lossy you can (or at least I can) hear THE difference.

If you're a dual format owner (and you should be) put in Dave Matthews/Tim Reynolds and start with the DD track. You may find it satisfying and "transparent" until you switch to the TrueHD track. The devil is in the details so why throw them away?:confused:

Wow Paul thank you for the great review. Very nice of you to take the time to post. I can't wait until I get my copy. Thank you, and too bad some trolls try to bash.

Actually, the audio system is calibrated so each speaker at sweet spot is exactly 75db (THX spec). Sub is a 15" supercube. Crossover from receiver to speaker is 80db. Room is about 15 x 19. It's New York, everyone. I can't crank it to theatre levels, lol. I did have a Krell Showcase pre and a Krell Theatre Amp Standard amp with B&W Ref's but it was complete overkill for the apartment.

The Kef's i use now have a nice neutral sound, without the brightness that some speakers have when dealing with digital sound. No, they aren't full range but if i kept the B&W's, that eviction notice would be slipped under my door faster than you can say " AVC is better than VC-1"

P.S, thanks for the backup fellas. Anytime i get a copy of something (HD-DVD or Blu for you neutral folks), I'll be glad to write something.

Later!

P

Transparent to whom is a relative term at best. ....
...put in Dave Matthews/Tim Reynolds and start with the DD track.
The Dave Matthews Blu-ray disk is DD (640kbps) not DD+ (1.7 Mbit/s), big difference. DD+ is almost triple the bitrate and a more advanced codec.

Filmmixer, who mixes audio for films professionally, has stated he can't tell the difference between his own DD+ tracks and the masters.

The Dave Matthews Blu-ray disk is DD (640kbps) not DD+ (1.7 Mbit/s), big difference. DD+ is almost triple the bitrate and a more advanced codec.


Another problem with his example is that the TrueHD encode on the Dave Matthews release is from a 96 kHz/24-bit master. The 640 kbps DD encode is obviously from a 48 kHz (I don't know the bit-depth) master.

Great insight and nice to see him looking into HD DVD. The six days sounds great and the TF2 updates, wow this disc is just going to bring perpetual value to people. I just guess imagine all the exclusives we're gonna get!!

Nice! This is the second HD DVD with one then, right (40YO Virgin being the first...Not counting those Brazil/Australia doc. discs).

Yeah Virgin was the first. I hope we see more, I'd like to see it for Stardust, and Shrek.

wow a single 15. my sub is 4 18in a ib with 3400wats the subs has the XBL^2 motor

Heck just that picture posted by the OP is worth the price of admission. :D

Jennifer Connelly's younger sister...

The aspect ratio in the theater was 2.35:1, and these screenshots are 1.78:1??

Thanks for the Review Paul.
Cannot wait for the disc!

God dayuuum this format war. I would soooo love to get this title. Sigh, unfortunately I can only afford one format. If only blu ray didn't have so many exclusives that I loved, I'd be in the hd dvd camp instead. ( Personally I prefer it on a price stand point and the red casings! ) :(
Man I wish I can. But I just spent a bomb on my home theater and new home so I had just enough left for one high definition player. Sigh. Even if I could get a hd dvd player, because of my schedule and budget ( I ain't gettin no xbox hd dvd add on or some chinese player crap ) I would probably only get it in february. That's a looooooooooong ass wait to watch transformers on hd. If only paramount went exclusive after transformers. Haha2nd generation Toshiba HD DVD player for less than $200 shipped...with 5 free movies with the mail in rebate. I know you're probably on a budget...but that's a very nice deal:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=922527

I have a lot to say -- especially when people are constantly arguing against straw men -- such as you, in this case.

Were I trying to have a discussing or argument over the merits of lossy v. lossless, then yes, I would think personal knowledge would be useful. Much more useful, of course, would be real world testing or testimony from experts in the field. But seeing that I've never tried to make an argument about this in the first place, this is completely irrelevant.

Why should you find it odd? As it turns out, this thread, quite naturally I would guess, is generally made up of HD DVD zealots that are +1 buddies of each other. some are much more reasonable than others, of course, as my previous reply to Michael notes. I have an natural fascination with this sort of attachment to a format, especially when people are so apt to argue against things that aren't even being argued. Nor am I shy about telling people my opinion where I find it relevant. Obviously, can't please everyone, but that's not why I'm here. I'm here for interesting discussion.

Like this one! :p

You've made well over ten posts in this thread, with the majority amounting to nothing more than "why didn't they include DTHD?"

And yes, to an extent, I think that you have to have real-world experience with the technologies being discussed before you can comment intelligently on the subject. Without a frame of reference, all you can really do is regurgitate the same talking points that have been repeated ad nauseam. How can you possibly have an opinion on high bitrate lossy vs lossless codecs when you haven't heard them?

BTW - I find it more than a little odd that you've posted more in this thread than anyone else (16 times so far, with the next highest being Dave Vaughn with 9.)

According your own example...shopper A refused to buy an HD DVD because of the COST involved, not because of the SOUND format........

So YES, even in your own example, Paramounts decision to not include TrueHD is, in fact, Irrelevant....

Again, I never argued that Paramount choosing not to include a TrueHD track would be of great importance to the average consumer. (I triple dog dare you to find otherwise. :D )

What I was saying is that I don't think movie formats and their relevant features should be determined what "Most people" find good enough.

Which argument made so far is valid?
1) There's no difference between 24 bit lossy and 24 bit lossless.
2) Get out of here Blu-ray fan boy!
3) You're just jealous!
4) You don't even own an HDM player so you can't have an opinion!
5) Most people can't hear the difference anyway!
6) Most people can't decode lossless anyway!
7) Sounds better than the blu-ray release!
8) Look at that dead bird flyin!

Oh, I love this post. A lot. hahaha

Blu-Boys out in force today



Paramount left, get over it.

ha, that can't be a real post, can it? Me hopes not!

For all those who still haven't gotten over Paramount/Dreamworks dumping Bluray - the "professional" reviews of Transformers are now coming out.

And the "professional" reviews are giving 5/5 for Video and 5/5 for Audio. This is apparently one of the BEST soundtracks to have yet hit HDM discs of either format. Seems to show that 1.5 mbps DD+ is up to the task just fine.

And quite honestly, as soon as Samsung gets their act together on their dual player, I'll quite happily pick up Transformers and piss off my neighbors by putting this no-doubt amazing soundtrack through its paces. I, for one, have no doubts that the soundtrack is impressive.

Then again, I've never seen the HD DVD, so I shouldn't be commenting on that. Right. :o

Yeah, thanks for the review and caps, Paul. Can't wait to watch the Spooky open up in 1080p glory. :D

I bumped my order up to next-day delivery so it will definitely be here on release date or a day earlier. These reviews are killing me... I just couldn't stand waiting any longer! :D

Mark

The aspect ratio in the theater was 2.35:1, and these screenshots are 1.78:1??

They are promotional pictures that have been out for quite a while now. Somebody took them and resized them to 1920x1080.

http://img98.imageshack.us/img98/5469/meganfoxtransformersprofr3.th.jpg (http://img98.imageshack.us/my.php?image=meganfoxtransformersprofr3.jpg) http://img370.imageshack.us/img370/8765/meganfoxtransformersproiz2.th.jpg (http://img370.imageshack.us/my.php?image=meganfoxtransformersproiz2.jpg) http://img370.imageshack.us/img370/5317/meganfoxtransformersprojw5.th.jpg (http://img370.imageshack.us/my.php?image=meganfoxtransformersprojw5.jpg) http://img370.imageshack.us/img370/9647/meganfoxtransformersproqr0.th.jpg (http://img370.imageshack.us/my.php?image=meganfoxtransformersproqr0.jpg) http://img148.imageshack.us/img148/935/01341meganfcelebutopia1lr4.th.jpg (http://img148.imageshack.us/my.php?image=01341meganfcelebutopia1lr4.jpg) http://img148.imageshack.us/img148/7475/meganfoxtransformersprobf8.th.jpg (http://img148.imageshack.us/my.php?image=meganfoxtransformersprobf8.jpg)

Those are some of the originals. They even still contain the exif data (Pictures taken with a Canon EOS-1D Mark II N).

It's a shame about the coverart, it's terrible and looks even worse in your real picture.

4 x 18"'s with 3600 watts to push reference levels... irieguy's theater room must have to footprint of an Olympic swimming pool with a 15 foot ceiling.

I just recieved my a 35 along with a copy of transformers last night. All i can say is wow what a great transfer. Both the pq and aq rock and you are never left wanting more, this disc delivers the goods.

The Dave Matthews Blu-ray disk is DD (640kbps) not DD+ (1.7 Mbit/s), big difference. DD+ is almost triple the bitrate and a more advanced codec...
Then what about Heart-Alive in Seatle (HD-DVD) which is much closer between the lossy and losless (48/16?) track?

Another problem with his example is that the TrueHD encode on the Dave Matthews release is from a 96 kHz/24-bit master. The 640 kbps DD encode is obviously from a 48 kHz (I don't know the bit-depth) master.
It is highly unlikely that two different multi channel mixes were prepared. The DD track is just sampled at 48KHz from the same master.;)

DVD Talk Transformers Review (http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/read.php?ID=30988)
The HD DVD:
I was recently at Paramount Pictures and spoke with Chris Saito, Vice President of Marketing for the studio. He called Transformers the "Signature HD DVD of the year." Of course, when you hear such talk from a man whose very job is marketing, you feel a little skeptical. But after looking at the phenomenal job Paramount did with this disc, I think he may be right. Every aspect of this title has been handled immaculately, from the animated menus to the picture and sound to the groundbreaking web-enabled extras. Let's take a closer look at what may very well be the must-buy HD optical disc of the year.

The Video:
For my day job, I work at a movie theater. I was there when Transformers opened. Michael Bay came to our theater personally and told us that we had the best presentation of any theater in Los Angeles. Later, when Transformers got an IMAX release, Michael Bay chose our theater to take his friends and family to. I have seen the film under scrupulously calibrated conditions and have in fact assisted with said calibrations. I have seen and ran the movie in 35mm and 2K digital, and watched it several times in IMAX. I don't say this to gloat, but rather to inform all of you that I know a hell of a lot about the technical presentation of Transformers.
With that in mind, this 2.35:1 AVC-encoded 1080p transfer is about the best home video representation of Transformers that you can expect to see for a very, very long time. The movie had an incredible digital interpositive made that became the source of the digital prints, IMAX prints, and presumably this HD DVD. I could make out every detail that I saw in the theaters, including the Cybertronian characters etched into the bodies of the Autobots and Decepticons. Color reproduction was perfect. Bay shot the film with many orange and blue hues, and this transfer does not wipe those away in favor of a more neutral palette. The movie was also much grainier than most people probably noticed, but we get all the grain just as if we were seeing it in the theater. What most impressed me that Paramount made no changes to this transfer was that in the film, many of the blacks are actually a dark blue. Same thing on the disc. There were no artifacts or other compression problems that I could find, including during sunset sequences, which are notoriously difficult to compress.

In other words, this transfer maintains all the character and vivaciousness of the theatrical exhibition. I watched several sequences from this disc in a screening room at Paramount, and if someone had told me I was watching an actual print of the movie, I would have believed them. That's how good it looks. While at times Bay's shooting style may be a little too grainy or dirty for aficionados who want nothing but a crystal clear image that looks like it was shot with the latest HD cameras, there's no doubt in my mind that this is exactly what both formats should be aiming for: A perfect recreation of the filmmakers' intentions.

The Audio:
Although Paramount has used lossless audio on a few of their other releases, the space of everything they wanted to include in this set meant that instead of including a Dolby True HD or a DTS-HD MA track, they went for a Dolby Digital Plus track encoded at 1.5 mbps. There's been a lot of buzz about the difference between 1.5 mbps DD+ and Dolby True HD, with many knowledgeable people saying that there is no audible difference even on professional equipment, while others claim to be able to hear the difference right in their own homes. I was very vocal about my outrage that Transformers, which aims to be a benchmark HD DVD, does not feature a lossless track of any kind. But now, having heard the audio for myself, I can understand why professional film mixers, HD DVD technical directors, and more claim that the difference is negligible.

Put simply, this 5.1 Dolby Digital Plus rocks hard. The level of aural detail is most impressive. I could hear every click and whine of the transforming parts, the grinding of metal when the robots fought, and even the startup sound of the 360 when it comes alive. During big action sequences, the surrounds were often used to assault the senses, but I noticed that the mixers would often use the rears for isolated sounds that they wanted to highlight, such as Frenzy's gibbering when he's on Air Force One. The bass has to be felt to be believed. At times it was so thunderous that I thought it might actually affect my bowels. Everything about this track just screams "REFERENCE!" and it holds up easily to the best PCM and True HD mixes that I have heard. Call me a doubter no more.


Don't get more clearer than that :)

TVPredictions Transformers review (http://www.tvpredictions.com/2007/10/hd-dvd-review-transformers.html)

THE VIDEO- 5 stars out of 5
Encoded using AVC (MPEG 4), the video on this disc is outstanding, almost perfect in fact. It is almost the equal to my favorite looking disc to date, Hot Fuzz. If you don't have that one, get it. The film is presented with incredible clarity and a bold color palette. Very deep blacks give this film a totally three dimensional look with excellent detail. The image literally leaps off the screen. The close up shots looking amazingly detailed as do to far shots which remain razor sharp. There is not even a hint of softness to this presentation on HD-DVD. Is it better than Spider-Man 3? To my eyes, yes, by just a smidge due to some softness of the image in just a couple of scenes in Spidey 3. They are both excellent. However, I must say that the CGI on this film is better than as seen in Spidey 3. The integration of the robots into this film is simply amazing. One never gets the impression that you are watching CGI unlike in Spider-Man 3. Clearly, this is a great time to be format neutral with these great new releases. This is reference video, folks.

THE AUDIO: 5 stars out of 5

Simply put, this is one of the best sounding discs I have ever heard. There were a lot of complaints when the specs for this disc were announced in August and did not included a Dolby True HD track. How could this title be released with only a Dolby Digital Plus track was the cry. It shows the lack of capacity of HD-DVD discs was the complaint. Not to worry. It turns out that all those complaints were unfounded. The Dolby Digital Plus track is outstanding. The sound on this disc is smooth and totally dynamic. The dialogue is full, rich and clear. The voice of Optimus Prime in the narration is totally lifelike. The sound field is totally immersive. Despite all the explosions and action, one never has any problem hearing the dialogue. The bass is incredible, among the best I have heard on disc. It is deep, taut and powerful. The surrounds are constantly in action. The battle scenes are fantastic with objects whizzing all around you constantly. I can't imagine how this disc could have sounded any better with True HD. I guess we may never know but after hearing this disc, I was certainly not longing to find out. The audio is that good. This is reference audio folks.

Nice review.

Perhaps DD+ is "lossless" up to the limits of human hearing, or at least 99.9% of humans.

The author infers DD+ left room to emphasize a feature rich disk:

All of the extras from the DVD set have been ported over, including the easter eggs, and all of those are also in high definition. So far, so good, but that's not what makes the set so noteworthy. No, that honor goes to the web-enabled content, which goes so far beyond what any other studio has done to date that I am amazed it has occurred so quickly in the format's life cycle. As of my writing this, Paramount has not yet taken their servers live, so I am going off of a presentation I attended on the studio lot. But what they showed me was in fact the final product, and believe me when I tell you that it truly opened my eyes to the potential of this new and uncharted aspect of the format.

DVDTalk reviews are the best IMO, I always look forward to 'em, thanks for the link - great review. =)

Everything about this track just screams "REFERENCE!" and it holds up easily to the best PCM and True HD mixes that I have heard. Call me a doubter no more.

Kudos to Dolby for making a codec which can sound as good as a PCM track while using 1/3 the space and 1/3 the bandwidth.

Her's another excellent one: http://www.iesb.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3473&Itemid=99

Transformers on HD-DVD...More Than Meets The Eye
Written by Josh Newey
Saturday, 13 October 2007
When writing on Transformers, whether it is the toy line, the classic cartoon show, or the recent blockbuster film, it’s incredibly difficult to avoid those incessant “more than meets the eye” puns. God knows we’ve heard them constantly in the mixed reviews for the film – “about what meets the eye”.



After visiting Paramount to view the specs on the new Transformers HDDVD, however, I am forced to follow those masses and use the classic phrase once again – this HDDVD has much more to please the fans than meets the eye.

The event, held by Annie Kaprielien, Jeff Radoyeis, Chris Sito and Alan Bell of the HDDVD’s development team, provided a first look into what the still-fresh format of HDDVD is really capable of. Mr. Sito repeatedly stressed the team’s goal to reach deeper into this technology and to pull out something that hasn’t been done before, integrating the gorgeous imagery of the film with a multitude of interactive and online features that flesh out the film as an experience.

Whereas the first disc on the DVD release will only contain the original film and standard commentary, the HDDVD release is loaded with material that will immerse the viewer into the film as an interactive experience.

One such feature is the Heads Up Display, which utilizes picture-in-picture to bring in select clips of B Roll, voice work sessions, behind-the-scene stunt construction, and factoids geared towards production as the film plays in its entirety, providing insight into all of the elements that go into constructing the scenes.

The real meat of the first disc, however, comes with the web-enabled features of the “Intelligence Mode”. Faithful to the sleek, futuristic feel of the film, Intelligence Mode frames the screen in high-tech gadgetry, emulating the feel of a videogame in its streamlined presentation. On the left edge of the screen, we see pictures of every Autobot and Decepticon currently in the scene, complete with health meter to monitor their stamina throughout their epic battles.

When a robot is introduced in the film, Intelligence Mode pulls up a bio, giving stats, weapon information, and history about the character. On the bottom of the screen, a text ticker provides fictional informational snippets about the current scene. There’s even a GPS tracking system at the top of the screen listing the latitude and longitude of the scene’s location!

Above most of the features shown, this seemed to be the most innovative. Bringing in character stats and bios makes the film feel a bit more alive and interactive, even if much of the information is unimportant and does little to actually flesh out the story. Still, it helps to bring the viewer deeper in to the Transformers mythos, something I’m sure longtime fans will have no trouble doing.

The disc will also carry promise of plenty of other downloadable material that will be updated periodically. Customizable menus based on your favorite robot, movie guides providing cast and crew bios and production stories, trailers for future projects, and even production information on Transformers 2 are just some of the possibilities mentioned.

In addition to this is a feature called MyClips, which allows viewers to construct a montage built solely out of his or her favorite clips and show it to an online community constructed for the film.

Disc 2 is also packed, this time with supplemental material that sheds further light on production and the powerful fanbase behind the series. The first section of the disc is comprised of three groups of in-depth featurettes. The first group, entitled “Our World”, focuses on different elements of production, from conception, to casting, to preparation and stunts.

The second group of featurettes, entitled “Their War”, celebrates these famous robots and their legacy, not to mention the dedicated fans that have kept the franchise going for so many years. These docs will look at the toy line, the construction of robots and selection of their vehicles, and the digital work that went into constructing the incredible creations onscreen.

The third group, called “More Than Meets The Eye”, focuses more on conceptual work, and these scenes are brought to life onscreen.

In addition to this, the second disc carries a “Tech Inspector” feature, which allows the viewer to see their favorite Transformers in full, high def resolution on a rotating 360-degree display. The display can be frozen and isolated to single body parts, and even has close-up action photos of the robot, letting the viewer examine the studio’s creation in full detail.

As if to pay tribute to that classic Transformers motto I mentioned earlier, the development the HDDVD also carries its fair share of Easter Eggs (5, to be exact), all of which are hidden well within the discs.

Overall, the two discs contain almost 10 hours of material, and as the downloadable content will constantly be updated, that number will always be expanding.

The development team seemed most excited about these possibilities— online promotions, future projects, online communities, interactivity and personalization are some of the key terms here— it’s exciting to see how the development of HDDVDs will continue to mold how we experience the films we love as time goes on.

Look for the Transformers HDDVD and DVD on Tuesday, October 16. It should certainly be well more than meets the eye.

Transformers PQ/AQ 5/5 High Def Disc News (http://www.highdefdiscnews.com/?p=239)
Video Quality on this release is 1080p in AVC MPEG-4 on a 30 gigabyte Dual-Layered HD DVD. Honestly straight up this is a flawless transfer with only a small amount of film grain present throughout. This is by far definitely superior to the DVD release. I had the chance to actually get to watch it a few times before this Review on DVD and I’ll say the difference is easily like “night and day.” So much more detail you’d never see on the DVD. The overall color palette is perfect and so are flesh tones. Speaking of flesh, 2 words “MEGAN FOX.” She alone is worth seeing in High Definition just herself. WOW! Speaking of WOW! let me say that the first glimpse we get of the new Chevy Camaro is sure to make any male’s (or female’s) jaw to drop for at least a few seconds. I’ve personally wanted one ever since they first showed the prototype to this car but I’ll say after seeing this I want one EVEN MORE!
Audio Quality on this release is in Dolby Digital Plus 5.1 @1.5Mbps. Sure it’s a shame this film didn’t get a Dolby TrueHD 5.1 mix as well like “A Mighty Heart” (which Paramount is releasing on the same day). But honestly it still really rocks and gets the job done, let me explain why. First off from the beginning of the film with the narration “Optimus Prime” (voiced by Peter Cullen) does to the end his voice absolutely stands out more than any noise or explosion. Speaking of which explosions, gunfire, robot footsteps and just generally all the sound effects feel very lifelike with an amazing rear channel presence. The bass is absolutely thumping but not in a bad way. The Dialogue is perfectly driven and mixed throughout the course of the film.

I think the musical score and Soundtrack to the film are great. The choice of songs “Bumblebee” plays trying to help “Sam” get lucky sound great in a 5.1 mix. Also the Smashing Pumpkins song “Doomsday Clock” is really used at a perfect point of the film. Overall I think this audio mix is pretty damn impressive but at the same time it would have been nice to have both Dolby Digital Plus & Dolby TrueHD. Either way this gets the job done and is sure to wake the neighbors, after all it IS a Michael Bay film.

Its a winner thats for sure :)

Isn't DD+ The same as DTS 1.5mbits anyway?

Both are 24bits, both are using 1.5mbits in most case on HDM?

Until today, I had yet to see an HD-DVD presentation of any kind. I wasn't really interested in the upgrade of software, mainly because I have a garage full of DVDs that will soon be obsolete. I was invited down to Paramount Studios today to check out their latest disc for Transformers. The representatives on hand were quick to point out that this was the "Most robust, fully realized version of an HD disc ever released."

I yawned. Of course it was. Right? I've been disappointed in just about every technical advance in home entertainment since the Star Wars DVDs came out. I don't know why, but with those discs, I thought **** was going to come flying out of my screen. That I was going to be magically transported directly into those mythical worlds I'd known since I was a kid. Sadly, that didn't happen. It was just like watching Star Wars on any regular old TV. And, in fact, the picture looked better coming off my tube television. I was disappointed to say the least. So, when I heard they were going to be showing Transformers to me on HD-DVD, I tossed the thought off as another choir.

Then they showed me that scene where the Scorponock, or whatever the Hell its called, comes out of the sand and hassles Josh Duhamel and Tyrese Gibson. It wasn't biblical, by any means. But damn, it was gorgeous. The colors were sharp, the infinite detail of the picture sent me into a euphoric state. Best of all, you could see the extreme amount of detail that went into every single piece of that robot. They also showed us other scenes, and that's all I could focus on. How well each working part of these robots fit together. It was all accounted for in extreme authenticity. My AOD (attention overcompensation disorder) kicked in, and I had this horrible urge to crawl up into the screen and wipe the dust from Optimus Prime's helmet.

But it was a ruse. A trick. A mean little game of consumer extortion. Why? Because this thing looked so awesome, I just have to have it right now! And that' an impossibility. To get the kind of clarity I was being shown, I'd have to purchase an HD TV, and an HD-DVD player, a theater-worthy sound system, and a concession stand for all of my friends who'd surely be at my house every evening to watch this incredible thing over an over again. I don't have that kind of money.

Maybe, hopefully, the robot army is planning an up rise. If I keep thinking that way, it will urge my hand into my wallet. Black plastic. That will fuel this sudden fire that Paramount has ignited in my heart. Credit is something I won't have to pay back if Megatron destroys most of the planet. Maybe I can convince the big lug to leave my apartment alone. I'll just sit in my half-destroyed hovel, watching the film over and over again.

The crazy thing about the two-disc set is the amount of DVD features it contains. This is a twenty-four hour ordeal wrapped in a shell of plastic. There are so many special and interactive features crammed into this HD-DVD, you won't be coming out of your room for a good week or two. The first disc alone has over eight hours of information on it. You have the entire movie itself. Which I wasn't a huge fan of. I thought it was all right. Fun. Exciting. But the second time I watched it, it just seemed like a lot of noise. Seeing it here, in HD-DVD, I'm going to have to rethink my critique of the film. It is a marvelous wonder of technology. And the High Definition really shows that off. I literally could sit and stare at this movie in complete amazement for a good seven days straight.

The disc contains a very intense, funny, and informative commentary by Michael Bay, the director of the film. The scene we watched had Shai LaBeouf being chased by real trained police dogs. Bay goes into this exciting story about how the dogs got away from their trainer, and actually almost killed LaBeouf. His way with words boosts the intensity of this scene as it is being shown on screen. There's a function that allows a little box to appear in the far left corner, and it shows Shia doing his own stunts. Falling and hurting himself. Jumping on these two barrels to keep from getting mauled to death. The look of fear on Shia's face is authentic, were are told, "This was the first night of shooting, and we almost lost our lead. He almost died that night. No joke. We knew something bad was up when the dog trainer said, "Uh-oh". Luckily for us, Shia is a fast runner."

One of the coolest features on the first disc is a grid function that has a GPS screen on it. It shows you were the characters are in terms of geographical location. It's this little map of the world, and we learn that the characters are in Los Angeles. Off to the side of this robotic looking piece of software is a character grid that has energy level bars for each Autobot or Deception being shown on screen. When they get hit or injured during the course of the film, the bar gets dimmer and dimmer. If they die, their character picture goes black. Its extinguished.

They are also working with a lot of Wed-based special features that will download themselves once you are logged into the Transformers database. When this disc streets on Tuesday, you will be able to download a new special feature every day for the next six days. There are also five Easter eggs hidden on the disc. One of them is an HD trailer for John Favreau's Iron Man. Another is an incredibly funny blooper featuring Michael Bay. The representatives on hand refused to clue us in as to where these Easter eggs could be found.

The second disc was your standard issue extra features disc, albeit with a High Def twist. The specials are split into three camps: Our World, Their War, and then a set of extras that are web based. We get an extensive look at the creators behind the film, the fandom that ensued, a look at Botcon, and an extensive biography on the Hasbro cartoon and toy line. Sadly, there are no bloopers. But if you are a true Transformers fan, you can't go wrong with this package. Everything you could possibly want to know about the franchise is accounted for here. And if its not, it will be downloaded to the disc soon enough.

You can register your disc and receive up-dates as to any new news on the Transformers 2 front. The cool thing about this is, even if you register your disc, they will not be able to tell that you stole it. So, seeing as how most of my readers don't have the cash to delve too deeply into this gorgeous looking Transformers package, they won't be able to track you down if you steal it and all of the expensive equipment that goes along with it. Trust me, I asked. With all of this web-enabled server equipment, I found it interesting that the government could possible track you with the use of this DVD. But Paramount assured me the disc wouldn't be used for individual profiling. And that all of the information is volunteered by the consumer.

Yeah, right.

After the presentation, I got to sit down with Peter Cullen, the voice of Optimus Prime, and have some Prime Rib. As it was an informal setting, I didn't record the conversation. But about a Transformers 2, he says he has signed on to it and a possible third entry. But that he can't offer any other information than that. He also said that he didn't record any new voice-overs for the DVD itself. Everything you hear on the menu and the grids is taken from the movie. He then started telling me about the motor home he just bought, and how he has decked it out with an HD-DVD system and TV screen. I asked him if he ever makes up voices for his vehicles, especially this new RV. He laughed, assuring everyone at the table that it was the best question he'd gotten in a long time, "Yeah, I guess I do that. I did give my new RV a voice."

"Do you ever have private conversations with it?"

"Yeah, I do. That is so funny." And he laughed. Then we continued eating Prime Rib. After lunch they gave me a life-sized Allspark box. I had to drive it home on my Vespa, and suddenly, I felt like I was in the movie itself. It was then, zipping through Hollywood traffic, that I decided not to waist the money on an HD-DVD player and plasma screen just yet. Whenever I feel that Transformers Jones coming over me, all I have to do is grab my Allspark and jump on the back of my scooter.

Then I opened the box. Inside was an HD-DVD of "Transformer". Damn, now I will be spending the rest of the evening looking for a High Def bargain. Those suckabitches got me!

If you have the means, indulge in this disc. You wont be disappointed. And that's the B. Alan guarantee

The DVD Talk review is very nice.. it's the best i saw yet. He mention the Grain is some scene witch was there in Theater (pretty heavy in a couple of scenes)... The disc seem to be a really good interpretation my theatrical experience..

Nice review.

Perhaps DD+ is "lossless" up to the limits of human hearing, or at least 99.9% of humans.

The author infers DD+ left room to emphasize a feature rich disk:

.

There is nothing to compare it to since no TrueHD track is provided.

You can vote and discuss HERE (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=922506)

Very detailed and impressive review:

http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/review.php?ID=30988

"...I watched several sequences from this disc in a screening room at Paramount, and if someone had told me I was watching an actual print of the movie, I would have believed them. That's how good it looks."

"...Put simply, this 5.1 Dolby Digital Plus rocks hard. The level of aural detail is most impressive. I could hear every click and whine of the transforming parts, the grinding of metal when the robots fought, and even the startup sound of the 360 when it comes alive.
...Everything about this track just screams "REFERENCE!" and it holds up easily to the best PCM and True HD mixes that I have heard. Call me a doubter no more."

At last we get an authentic and awesome review which forced me to click the "Add to Cart" button.

I touched a copy of Transformers today (but was not allowed to buy it).
It was pretty exciting :D

I would click the add to cart button but I decided not to.



I'm just gonna go out and put in my cart on Tuesday. ;)

DVDTalk reviews are the best IMO, I always look forward to 'em, thanks for the link - great review. =)

The Conclusion:
Transformers was one of 2007's biggest films, and easily the most exciting. Michael Bay perfectly melded state of the art visual effects with some strong and funny actors to create his best effort yet. This HD DVD offers both reference picture and sound, as well as all of its special features in high definition. Not only that, but it also provides web-enabled content that marks a major leap forward in what HD DVD can do as a format. For fans of the film, for tech heads, for HD geeks alike, this disc is absolutely essential. DVD Talk Collector Series.

DVD Talk Collector Series :)

I still can't believe they would not do a DTS-HD or at least Dolby TrueHD for this one!!! :eek:

So many perfect scores... makes waiting that much harder!

Its worth the wait guys! Ive watched my copy atleast 4 times already this weekend :D My poor sub hates me :)

I still can't believe they would not do a DTS-HD or at least Dolby TrueHD for this one!!! :eek:

I agree! I'm sure I'm in the total minority here but I could really care less about any extras. Just give me the best video & audio at max bit rates and I'm happy.

That said I wouldn't be surprised if this was re-released down the road with TrueHD/DTS HD MA just to get us to buy it again. Same ploy the studios do with all the same dvd's being endlessly re-released.

I really don'y get it. The title gets a 5/5 audio rating from just about every review and people want more wtf. Think about it folks if the audio is already 5/5 do you actually believe a TrurHD track would somehow make it 6/5?

You can't please everyone...

I am counting the hours for my copy!!!!!


Djoel

I really don'y get it. The title gets a 5/5 audio rating from just about every review and people want more wtf. Think about it folks if the audio is already 5/5 do you actually believe a TrurHD track would somehow make it 6/5?
Think about it this way. If a 24-bit PCM or TrueHD track gets 4 1/2 stars out of 5, does that mean it can still sound better on a technical level? The answer would obviously be no since uncompressed audio can't sound any better than the original master. Less than stellar audio is typically due to poor sound design more than anything else. Now everyone already knows Transformers has killer audio. Having seen (and heard) Transformers multiple times in theaters I'm not the least bit surprised that it's consistently getting perfect scores from reviewers, but that doesn't neccesarily mean it's as good as it can sound. Listening to Optimus Prime knock Megatron on his ass sounds great whether it's in DD, DTS, or DD+, but how anyone can say that at 1.5mbps all additional or perceived benefit is totally lost is beyond me. I personally think that lossless and uncompressed sounds better than DD+ but that's just me. Out of my top 5 favorite discs for audio only 1 is in DD+ (Tokyo Drift). The whole counterpoint of having nothing to compare it to is moot anyways since having no comparison makes disproving the original argument impossible too. Now if Paramount offered a free exchange program wherein they reissued Transformers WITH TrueHD would any of you guys pass it up? You can lie and say you won't but truthfully no one wouldn't want that. Isn't that proof enough that most if not all people believe TrueHD sounds better than DD+?

Think about it this way. If a 24-bit PCM or TrueHD track gets 4 1/2 stars out of 5, does that mean it can still sound better on a technical level? The answer would obviously be no since uncompressed audio can't sound any better than the original master. Less than stellar audio is typically due to poor sound design more than anything else. Now everyone already knows Transformers has killer audio. Having seen (and heard) Transformers multiple times in theaters I'm not the least bit surprised that it's consistently getting perfect scores from reviewers, but that doesn't neccesarily mean it's as good as it can sound. Listening to Optimus Prime knock Megatron on his ass sounds great whether it's in DD, DTS, or DD+, but how anyone can say that at 1.5mbps all additional or perceived benefit is lost is beyond me. I personally think that lossless and uncompressed sounds better than DD+ but that's just me. Out of my top 5 favorite discs for audio only 1 is in DD+ (Tokyo Drift). The whole counterpoint of having nothing to compare it to is moot anyways since having no comparison makes disproving the original argument impossible too.

If it already sounds perfect then wasting more bits is not going to make much of a difference imo. Here is what an expert in the movie encoding business has to say about DD+ at 1.5mbps.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=11903666&postcount=1631
"My experience has been that DD+ at 1.5 is transparent to the master.

Even thought I don't know the in's and out's for why each studio takes a given position on lossy vs lossless, to me as a film professional it is a moot point. I have no qualms with my work being presented as a HBR lossy encode... It would be great to not have to discuss this point forever, and have each studio go lossless as a rule, but I am sure if that was the case then we would then find something else to chew on

I know that there are others in the business that feel the same way that I do, and I know that there are others that don't.

I have an open invitation for anybody to come and compare a lossy encode to the master in the Los Angeles area..... they can switch back and forth at will, and if they can reasonably tell me which one is which 3 out of 4 times, I will buy them a really good lunch.
__________________
Film Sound and Post Production Insider

Re-Recording Mixer, Hollywood, CA."

^As if that's never been referenced before. Seriously, this is one guy's opinion and it's been quoted to high heaven. Not that I'm questioning his motives or expertise, but something this subjective can only be assessed with one's own ears. I'll ask again, if Paramount offered a free exchange program wherein they reissued Transformers WITH TrueHD would you pass it up? If getting TrueHD is worth the trouble of packing and shipping your disc back to Paramount and waiting several weeks for the replacement then obviously it's not a waste. At the very least, if knowing that I'm listening to the best possible sound makes me think it sounds better then that to me is a good thing.

Nice review. Tuesday is almost here :D

Yeah I saw this review earlier today. I was most impressed with it coming from that site. I've read some other reviews there before and they definitely grade on a Blu curve.

Its very good, but not quite as good as 300 in PQ/WOW factor.

Its very good, but not quite as good as 300 in PQ/WOW factor.

300's intentional grainy look, I didn't like much. Actually I thought it didn't seem HD at all and originally posted here to ask if I somehow did not do something right with my connection/settings. The PIP looks gorgeous. I don't consider 300 reference quality, everyone that sees it says "that's HD?" so I always showcase Planet Earth or another HD DVD instead. Now I will use TF of course.

Transformers takes all the prejudice and completely ignorant talk about Blu-Ray superiority and slams it with a 3-ton hammer.

This is what high-definition movies are suppose to look and sound like. A masterpiece in home entertainment.

I've seen people buying HD DVD add-ons for 360s like CRAZY! Nowhere not even my neighborhood Target has HD DVD add-ons in stock.

If other paramount titles look and sound like this with off the hook interactivity, there's absolutely no way that Warner won't draw the line and say enough with this Blu-Ray fiasco.

Can you guys imagine how Iron man will look like? Wowza!


I would like to ask the Panasonic guys and Disney's Iger what exactly is wrong with this incredible HD DVD release? It seems that none of the items he was addressing have caused problems here.

300's intentional grainy look, I didn't like much. Actually I thought it didn't seem HD at all and originally posted here to ask if I somehow did not do something right with my connection/settings. The PIP looks gorgeous. I don't consider 300 reference quality, everyone that sees it says "that's HD?" so I always showcase Planet Earth or another HD DVD instead. Now I will use TF of course.

+1

300 looks nice, exactly what the director wanted - oh well, more power to him I suppose, its just NOT the disc I find myself reaching for to show off my system, no way...got plenty of others that display razor sharp clarity, color and detail, with a TRADITIONAL CLEAN look...not knocking 300, just sayin', theres others I hold above it to display what HiDef can look like (as opposed to boring old standard) to friends, I suspect Transformers is on the list now as well!!

I have Always preferred the DVDTalk reviews. I can't stand the HDD reviews.
BTW, a great website that offers links to several reviews on each movie is
http://www.hddb.net/index.php

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


Very nice!

300 looks insanely 3-D on my screen.

Transformers looks good, too. But 300, DAMN.

I like the section about the DD+ audio. He admitted that he was one of the people who kicked and screamed that TrueHD was not used and then was converted into a true believer in the power of DD+ 1.5. BTW, I like DVDTalk reviews as well.

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

Well just like he rated it, the soundtrack sounds amazing. I bet though, at some point in the future, they will release another version with a lossless track.

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


Very nice!

I really stopped carrying what HighDef Digest says anymore. Many of their reviewers are simply pro-Blu. Sure the whole site is not biased but many of the people writing reviews have this very sarcastic voice always reviewing HD DVD titles. They have reviews where they say it's incredible quality, but it could be hypothetically bettter and then they slap 4 stars. All BS to be honest. Then you take Pirates of The Caribean Black Perl, which gets 5 star ratings and the movie looks completely crappy. Noise all over the place, lack of details overall, but hey it's Blu-Ray, it's a hot title, it has to get a 5 star PQ. Stuff like this is really very obvious.

Now, I will not deny, unlike Black Pearl, Dead Man's Chest is absolutely stunning, but this is really beside the point. It just shows an incredible paper-spec bias that reached even the High-Def Digest.

I find them to be the most fair... I like their reviews a lot for this stuff, regardless this review here sounds great, doesn't seem pro anything, other than the movie.

I like the section about the DD+ audio. He admitted that he was one of the people who kicked and screamed that TrueHD was not used and then was converted into a true believer in the power of DD+ 1.5. BTW, I like DVDTalk reviews as well.

I have to completely agree..these guys seem very objective.

On the other hand, go read the HDD review of Transformers. BS all around.. typical Blu-Ray spewing.

I'm paraphrasing:

"Oh the title looks amazing and sounds incredible, but you know it would've sounded 10 times better if it was PCM or TrueHD and if the disc was 50gb"

I'm getting sick of that site to be honest. The blu-bias is extremely annoying and it's absolutely amazing how many sites and professionals will discredit themselves with stupid remarks like that or Blu cheering when their jobs are supposed to be objective. When the title is AWESOME, then don't go around spewing crap how you are certain it would sound or look better.

Absolutely ridiculous.

I find them to be the most fair... I like their reviews a lot for this stuff, regardless this review here sounds great, doesn't seem pro anything, other than the movie.

No but even though he said it was absolutely an amazing track and he gave it 5 stars, he continuously brings up the fact that they didn't include a lossless. He even mentions it in the extras section. How you can say this is one of the best he has ever heard and the next minute lambasting their choice to use it is beyond me.

I assume you mean high def digest? He did make a comment about the studio being forced to use DD+ because of space but they did still score the audio 5 stars. I had not really noticed high def digest being Blu biased but then again I don't read a whole lot of their reviews.

I'd like to point out that Hot Fuzz is the only disc to ever recieve a five star rating overall and it's on HD DVD. So, I actually don't think their biased.

Though I kinda wish he wouldn't harp so much on the lack of Dobly TrueHD, because until we can compare the two, there's no way it can sound better.