This poll is only open to people who have watched Transformers on HD DVD and listened to the DD+ sound track. BD exclusive owners who have not seen the movie need not vote.

Lets find out what everyone thinks about the quality of the DD + track. Lord knows there we 100s of posts from a ton of AVS members trashing how this was going to sound. Many said they would rather buy the SD DVD because it didnt have Lossless.


Well lets see shall we.

i really doubt anyone who has a hd dvd player would buy the SD DVD regardless of whether or not it had lossless track. i haven't seen any hd dvd supporter say they won't buy the movie b/c it didnt have lossless audio, only ppl saying they cant tell the diff between 1.5 and lossless.

there's also no way to judge the DD+1.5 track b/c there is no TrueHD track to compare it with, and it certainly will be better than a DD+640. i have heard the 448kbps track on DVD and it is rather disappointing.

The choices are insulting. If it is on par with lossless/LPCM, it *has* to surpass everyone's expectations? If it met someone's expectations, then it has to be only better than other, lesser lossy?

The wording is very blu biased. I'm going to have to go with I hate this poll, since the choices are making statements for us. And I don't even have the disc yet.. this is on principle (but I will come Tuesday, if in-store supply is sufficient)

Why isn't this in the hd dvd software section again?

really can't compare the track to any other movie b/c those have different masters. theoretically 24bit should sound better than 16, but i found the audio in Underworld to be better than POTC.

The choices are insulting. If it is on par with lossless/LPCM, it *has* to surpass everyone's expectations? If it met someone's expectations, then it has to be only better than other, lesser lossy?

The wording is very blu biased. I'm going to have to go with I hate this poll, since the choices are making statements for us. And I don't even have the disc yet.. this is on principle (but I will come Tuesday, if in-store supply is sufficient)

huh? read the choices again.

Either the movie surpassed, met, or was below expectaion. How can those choices be insulting? BTW as someone who owns over 100 HD DVDs and apx 50 BDs and a quality HT, DD+ does not have to surpase my expectations in order to be on par with any losless PCM or THD track I have heard.

my poll is not blu biased. Sorry but you are wrong.

I don't even have the disc yet

**On a side note. Did you not read my orginal OP and the question? It read this poll is only open to people who have seen the movie.

Since you have not your opinion is not only not wanted, but not valuable in this poll. I have not yet seen the movie hence th reason I have not voted.

really can't compare the track to any other movie b/c those have different masters. theoretically 24bit should sound better than 16, but i found the audio in Underworld to be better than POTC.


Perfect. People like you are exactly who I hope post here...only after tey see/hear the movie.

Put aside specs and vote with what you hear. Is that not the most important thing?

If the thread was comparing POTC w/ Underworld you would choose Underworld (so would I BTW).

In your opinion when you actually watchTransformers does the quality compare to a different movie with lossless PCM/THD?

What if there were no specs printed on it, or any BD/HD DVD and you did not know if it was DD+, lossless PCM or THD. How would it sound then? equal to, greater then or less then the best of the best?

thats the real question.

again....vote when you have actually heard it.

Why isn't this in the hd dvd software section again?

because its a topic which has obviously consumed people from "both sides". Actually if you go by post count this poll should have been posted in the BD forum and not the HD DVD forum..right?

So long as it sounds good who cares what codec is used?

because its a topic which has obviously consumed people from "both sides". Actually if you go by post count this poll should have been posted in the BD forum and not the HD DVD forum..right?

Uhh no. You're asking an opinion about an HD DVD exclusive disc. Anyway, useless thread #162343 on Transformers but whatever.

Perfect. People like you are exactly who I hope post here...only after tey see/hear the movie.

Put aside specs and vote with what you hear. Is that not the most important thing?

If the thread was comparing POTC w/ Underworld you would choose Underworld (so would I BTW).

In your opinion when you actually watch Transformers does the quality compare to a different movie with lossless PCM/THD?

What if there were no specs printed on it, or any BD/HD DVD and you did not know if it was DD+, lossless PCM or THD. How would it sound then? equal to, greater then or less then the best of the best?

thats the real question.

again....vote when you have actually heard it.

well i dont have hd dvd stand alone so no DD+1.5 for me. no xbox ao either, waiting for an internal drive.

the thing is tho, b/c there is no lossless track to make comparisons, it really defeats the purpose of this thread. we can only determine whether we think the audio is good, not whether we think "if" a lossless track is present it would sound better. i was disappointed with the 448 track on the dvd, the digital theater i saw this movie in really spoiled me i think. if the dd+1.5 sounds no better than 448, chances are a lossless track will sound just as disappointing.

So long as it sounds good who cares what codec is used?

wouldnt make a diff even if we did care b/c a lossless track wont magically appear on the disc as a result of us caring.

btw post prob should be in the hd dvd software section, tho i wouldnt have seen it if it was there. this is hd dvd exclusive disc so no reason for it to be here prob. you dont see our issues over dracula and potc framing here.

I should get my disc on Wednesday - so I can't vote yet - but I can hardly wait.

This DD+ soundtrack is getting RAVE reviews and I have no doubt that it is going to be spectacular.

And yes, I think all the trash-talking of the soundtrack in advance, before they had even heard it, was just a BD strategy to reduce sales. They were trying to persuade people to NOT buy the 1.5 mbps DD+ soundtrack, but instead buy a DVD with a 448k DD soundtrack. --- Sure... that makes a LOT of sense... not.

** BTW - I LOVE that this is a public poll...

Nice poll, can't tell who you are in it for.....;)


Apples vs. oranges FTL


How about Para has a lossless track and a DD+ track so we compare? no? OK, I will wait for the double dip with lossless thank you. I will rent it though.

I chose the option of "Surpassed my expectations and I feel it is on par with many lossless PCM and TrueHD tracks" because that was the choice that most closely fits my opinion of this release.

It is the best DD+ track I have heard since King Kong and is better then several PCM and TrueHD tracks I have heard. Is it better then say the PotC movies or the Dave Mathews release? No, but it isn't all that far behind either.

~Josh

I chose the option of "Surpassed my expectations and I feel it is on par with many lossless PCM and TrueHD tracks" because that was the choice that most closely fits my opinion of this release.

It is the best DD+ track I have heard since King Kong and is better then several PCM and TrueHD tracks I have heard. Is it better then say the PotC movies or the Dave Mathews release? No, but it isn't all that far behind either.

~Josh

And yet it only scores a 4 out 5 in your review. Why, because it's not lossless, thus not worthy? :rolleyes:

The third option should be called "I'm a PS3 owner and have never listened the sound track but I wanted to dis it anyway".

It's a public vote, we know who you are! :D

Here's a passage on the DD+ track from the DVDTalk review (whole review is here (http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/read.php?ID=30988)):


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.

The choices are insulting. If it is on par with lossless/LPCM, it *has* to surpass everyone's expectations? If it met someone's expectations, then it has to be only better than other, lesser lossy?

The wording is very blu biased. I'm going to have to go with I hate this poll, since the choices are making statements for us. And I don't even have the disc yet.. this is on principle (but I will come Tuesday, if in-store supply is sufficient)This is exactly what I thought upon seeing the first two choices. I fully expect this soundtrack to match PCM/TrueHD out there. But if I choose "met expectations" the commentary is throwing me off because I wasn't expecting it to be a "bit better than DD"...I still don't have the disc but I know I won't be able to vote here.

For me "met expecatations" = "it is on par with many lossless PCM and TrueHD tracks" given the ability of DD+ at 1.5Mbps to sound incredible on numerous prior titles.

Why isn't this in the hd dvd software section again?

cuz p-day got me to go format neutral and this title was a big reason.

Not the greatest film ever, but I grew up in the Transformers era and am really looking forward to the HD release.

I have to laugh at the choices. Especially this one:
"Proves the trash talk re DD+ was just to bring down the excitement of this HD DVD"

What a ridiculous thing to say.

It can't be that people want the best sound possible on this release, it must be that those people are anti-HD-DVD.

The irrational, immature red case posturing continues.

Worship everything on HD-DVD or get lost. That is the mentality on this forum.

HDDVD forum has simply turned into this:
Every release is amazing as long as it comes in a red case. Period. No one is aloud to ask the HD-DVD studios to step up and release lossless audio. That is just trash talk.

This HDDVD forum has turned into a regime. Very bizarre.

How did so many of you get this title ahead of its release? I didn't vote because I haven't seen it.

It can't be that people want the best sound possible on this release, it must be that those people are anti-HD-DVD.

Just curious. If the overwhelming opinion is, and seems to be, that this DD+ is as good any lossless track.............wouldn't that qualify as best sound possible?

This HDDVD forum has turned into a regime. Very bizarre.

Dude, this entire forum has just gotten out of hand. It's not just this section.

I have to laugh at the choices. Especially this one:
"Proves the trash talk re DD+ was just to bring down the excitement of this HD DVD"

What a ridiculous thing to say.

It can't be that people want the best sound possible on this release, it must be that those people are anti-HD-DVD.

The irrational, immature red case posturing continues.

Worship everything on HD-DVD or get lost. That is the mentality on this forum.

HDDVD forum has simply turned into this:
Every release is amazing as long as it comes in a red case. Period. No one is aloud to ask the HD-DVD studios to step up and release lossless audio. That is just trash talk.

This HDDVD forum has turned into a regime. Very bizarre.

Well, I have this disc, and the audio is better than most of my other titles with TrueHD. Yes, Lossless would have been good to compare, but as many professional reviewers and audio engineers who have posted on here have attested to, hard to see how except on a piece of paper with a spec wrtten on it.

The audio is just that good, Period. BD Boys are furious as another of their arguments leaves the building. So I think we are down to bitrate and Nature's Journey. With the producer of that admitting he can't really see any difference, and could have added a lossless track to that as well.

Basically BD & HD DVD are the same, re picture quality. The only difference now, the studios, the cost of players and the online interactivity that does not work on BD yet.

I should get my disc on Wednesday - so I can't vote yet - but I can hardly wait.
Not having the disk hasn't stopped some from voting:

...Looking forward to picking this one up on Tuesday!

Look at the jerks who chose option 3, as if they even heard the track.

...

Basically BD & HD DVD are the same, re picture quality. The only difference now, the studios, the cost of players and the online interactivity that does not work on BD yet.

Also add The Next Generation Feature that BD doesn't have yet, ... PiP Interactivity like "Transformers" HUD!

Transformers on HD-DVD...More Than Meets The Eye (http://www.iesb.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3473&Itemid=99)
Written by Josh Newey

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.

I'll vote after I get my EXCLUSIVE HD DVD on Tuesday.

Phil

Well, I have this disc, and the audio is better than most of my other titles with TrueHD. Yes, Lossless would have been good to compare, but as many professional reviewers and audio engineers who have posted on here have attested to, hard to see how except on a piece of paper with a spec wrtten on it.

The audio is just that good, Period. BD Boys are furious as another of their arguments leaves the building. So I think we are down to bitrate and Nature's Journey. With the producer of that admitting he can't really see any difference, and could have added a lossless track to that as well.

Basically BD & HD DVD are the same, re picture quality. The only difference now, the studios, the cost of players and the online interactivity that does not work on BD yet.

Nice to see a little common sense amongst all the denial, spin and FUD! Many here are equipment junkies and some spec junkies - when the specs take precedence over the actual PQ and AQ then any rational debate is impossible.

Cheers,

Grant

Look at the jerks who chose option 3, as if they even heard the track.I just noticed that....Sad!

So long as it sounds good who cares what codec is used?

That is EXACTLY what the OP is trying to get at!! He is saying, put specs aside, LISTEN to the movie, enjoy it, and then post here saying whether or not the DD+ track impressed or disappointed you.


That is all he is asking folks. I don't understand why that is so hard. And its NOT Blu-biased.

Nice to see a little common sense amongst all the denial, spin and FUD! Many here are equipment junkies and some spec junkies - when the specs take precedence over the actual PQ and AQ then any rational debate is impossible.

Cheers,

Grant

Rational? That is hilarious on this forum.

Read the posts on this thread. These people are fixated on nothing but beating blu-ray. They are not concerned about whether lossless is better than DD+, their complete focus is on the competitor.

Rational?

Rational? That is hilarious on this forum.

Read the posts on this thread. These people are fixated on nothing but beating blu-ray. They are not concerned about whether lossless is better than DD+, their complete focus is on the competitor.

Rational?With respect - this whole debate wouldn't exist if the BD side hadn't been so intent on slagging off this title for "lack of lossless" without even *hearing* it...

I think it has come as an unhappy surprise to some that this has now been rated as one of the BEST soundtracks available on HDM. I would suggest that this is where much of the "fixation" is actually originating...

Has anyone confirmed the bitrate and especially the bit depth of this track? Thanks.

Well, I have this disc, and the audio is better than most of my other titles with TrueHD.

Yonexsp: how did you get your disc so early? I am also in Canada, and if there is a vendor that can supply new releases early, I would like to use it.

Thanks.

That is EXACTLY what the OP is trying to get at!! He is saying, put specs aside, LISTEN to the movie, enjoy it, and then post here saying whether or not the DD+ track impressed or disappointed you.


That is all he is asking folks. I don't understand why that is so hard. And its NOT Blu-biased.


Thats kinda like saying, SD dvd is fine if you never seen HDDVD. No one knows what the difference between lossless and DD+. Or as they say ignorance is bliss.

With respect - this whole debate wouldn't exist if the BD side hadn't been so intent on slagging off this title for "lack of lossless" without even *hearing* it...

I think it has come as an unhappy surprise to some that this has now been rated as one of the BEST soundtracks available on HDM. I would suggest that this is where much of the "fixation" is actually originating...

I'll be the judge of that!!

(when my system is back up on line)

I chose the option of "Surpassed my expectations and I feel it is on par with many lossless PCM and TrueHD tracks" because that was the choice that most closely fits my opinion of this release.

It is the best DD+ track I have heard since King Kong and is better then several PCM and TrueHD tracks I have heard. Is it better then say the PotC movies or the Dave Mathews release? No, but it isn't all that far behind either.

~Josh

Great to hear such an honest opinion of this. I will not have the disc until the 16th, but I have revamped my DIY speaker setup this week with some new floor standing speakers just for this release.

Has anyone confirmed the bitrate and especially the bit depth of this track? Thanks.


Don't quote me on this but my understanding is it is a 24bit 1.5Mbs DD+ track.

With respect - this whole debate wouldn't exist if the BD side hadn't been so intent on slagging off this title for "lack of lossless" without even *hearing* it...

I think it has come as an unhappy surprise to some that this has now been rated as one of the BEST soundtracks available on HDM. I would suggest that this is where much of the "fixation" is actually originating...

I think it is totally fair to question why Paramount is not using lossless audio when most every other hi-def studio is. I don't think that has anything to do with the BD side. It has everything to do with Paramount's codec choices.

There is far too much competitive posting going on here. You can't even find much valuable information anymore. It is mostly "take that blu-ray, the blu boys will hate this, so much for not having enough space"...and on and on and on. What grade are these people in??

Anyway, I for one am thrilled that the sound quality on Transformers is getting such excellent reviews. So thrilled that I did exactly what I said I wouldn't do, I ordered it from Amazon.

I really didn't want to buy this title and send a message to Paramount that it is ok to forego lossless on their titles. I had a lengthy discussion with Film Mixer on another thread and he gives a good argument for DD+ 1.5mbps, but I am still not convinced that it can equal the master while throwing data away.

Regardless, I bought the title.

I'm still hoping that Paramount starts releasing lossless audio on all titles in the future.

rwduke I have been reading a little more on people that were at the Paramount screening of the HD DVD this weekend.

It seems to me that perhaps.....I stress the word PERHAPS because I don't know.........Paramount and Dreamworks did what I thought they would. They have apparently put the entire farm into the interactive portion of the HD DVD. It sounds to me like they didn't want to waste time with a lossless track that wasn't really going to sound any better than the DD+ track they had, and that freed up time and energy into the "PiP" stuff and the second disc.

That's what it sounds like to me anyway.

I really didn't want to buy this title and send a message to Paramount that it is ok to forego lossless on their titles. I had a lengthy discussion with Film Mixer on another thread and he gives a good argument for DD+ 1.5mbps, but I am still not convinced that it can equal the master while throwing data away.
Sorry we're getting in your way of beating a dead horse into a pile of goo. How much more can be said? I'll take Filmmixer's professional view and the overwhelming number of real world reports that DD+ is transparent. The fact you want to belittle the rest of the forum because we don't share your pointless crusade is misguided. Step away from your obsession with specs, and your expectation that everyone should share your obsession.

I chose the option of "Surpassed my expectations and I feel it is on par with many lossless PCM and TrueHD tracks" because that was the choice that most closely fits my opinion of this release.

It is the best DD+ track I have heard since King Kong and is better then several PCM and TrueHD tracks I have heard. Is it better then say the PotC movies or the Dave Mathews release? No, but it isn't all that far behind either.

~Josh

And yet you gave it a 4.5/5???
Did the fact that it was an HD DVD exclusive, warrant the .5 deduction in points?:rolleyes:

Thats kinda like saying, SD dvd is fine if you never seen HDDVD. No one knows what the difference between lossless and DD+. Or as they say ignorance is bliss.

So you can never enjoy something for what it is, only for what you can compare it to? Sucks to be you.

If you like something, it SHOULD be regardless to what else it could have been. Either the track is active enough, clear enough, and accurate enough or it isn't. It shouldn't matter WHAT the label on the codec says.

I just went format neutral with the a 35. I recieved both transformer and the a 35 on saturday. All i can say about the audio is wow. The scene were frenzy is stealing secrets off airforce one is unbeleviable. My sub was sendeing shivers of joy down my spine, unbeliviable. I for one coudln't tell the difference in the quality between the uncompressed pcm of potc and the true hd of 300, the sound on transformers rocks.

And yet you gave it a 4.5/5???
Did the fact that it was an HD DVD exclusive, warrant the .5 deduction in points?:rolleyes:

Of course.

He admits that it is only slightly behind Dave Matthews -- arguably the BEST sounding disc on either side -- and PoTC discs..and then gives it a 4.5. :rolleyes:

I have the Dave disc and I actaully thought though it sounds good, its only vocals and acoustic guitar. That just doesnt floor me.

Bay's films always have sick mixes. I'm going to hear the dd dvd version on tuesday and I'll bet even that is amazing, although not as good as the 1.5mps track on the hd disc.

Sure, lossless is great.The more the merrier. But the guy manning the controls is more important.It's not all about the codecs.

Dont get me wrong, you have the option of having more data...take it. But when its not there you can still have an amazing track.

I've yet to hear a lossless track yet that takes top prize over anything in my dvd collection.But I havent bought anything to replace my dvd's yet.Just titles I didnt have.
So hopefully I can make some side by side comparisons soon.

I gotta remember to try that AVP disc.

Sounds pretty good but I still prefer DTS-HD or Dolby trueHD...

Wow, exit polling is going to be tough for the studios trying to guage the audiences' responses.

I can see it now:


"So, did you like the movie? Did it look and sound good to you?"

"Gee, I'm not sure. I'll have to wait until the movie comes out on BD and check the label for the codecs used for video and audio and the bit meter on my PS3 during playback...THEN I'll be sure and get back to you!"

I've yet to hear a lossless track yet that takes top prize over anything in my dvd collection.

I hope you are joking!

rwduke I have been reading a little more on people that were at the Paramount screening of the HD DVD this weekend.

It seems to me that perhaps.....I stress the word PERHAPS because I don't know.........Paramount and Dreamworks did what I thought they would. They have apparently put the entire farm into the interactive portion of the HD DVD. It sounds to me like they didn't want to waste time with a lossless track that wasn't really going to sound any better than the DD+ track they had, and that freed up time and energy into the "PiP" stuff and the second disc.

That's what it sounds like to me anyway.

That's understandable --- and more importantly, I really appreciate your attempt at answering an honest question with an honest answer.

The question then is, I thought HD DVD's capabilities were more than enough to do all that amazing interactive stuff, have HQ video, and throw in a lossless track for poops and giggles. You really think doing a TrueHD track would have side-tracked so much they couldn't have done as much work on the interactive stuff?

And while I completely respect FilmMixer's views, I would like to note that Richard from Nature's Journey fame, disagrees.

That's understandable --- and more importantly, I really appreciate your attempt at answering an honest question with an honest answer.

The question then is, I thought HD DVD's capabilities were more than enough to do all that amazing interactive stuff, have HQ video, and throw in a lossless track for poops and giggles. You really think doing a TrueHD track would have side-tracked so much they couldn't have done as much work on the interactive stuff?

I would have to say yes. And don't forget, any TrueHD track on the disc is required to have a DD+ track along with it for players that only decode 2 channels of the DTHD track. So again, if the DD+ track is THAT good, and all indications are that it is, then why waste the resources on it when you can work on other things. I do believe FilmMixer did say there was a process that goes into a DHTD track.

Doing it just to do it is not efficient. I'd rather they be efficient and get everything perfect. It appears by all reviews and accounts they did just that.

And while I completely respect FilmMixer's views, I would like to note that Richard from Nature's Journey fame, disagrees.

Richard also has a hatred for Dolby it seems, so I don't believe he can objectively counter anything FilmMixer says. And for me, I'll take the opinion of someone who does audio for a living.

That too is understandable -- if adding a TrueHD tracks takes significantly more time or money, that would be a reason. Why do you think they Paramount uses it on other movies, however?

Even if does have a Hatred for Dolby, that doesn't mean he'd be wrong about lossless v. lossy -- and while FilmMixer is an expert in the field of Theater audio creation, Richard does have experience with audio tracks in the optical media realm.

Still -- what we REALLY need is a good article by the team at Audioholics, to finally put this baby to rest.

All the same -- I really am to excited to finally get into the HD media game and enjoy the eye and ear candy that Transformers apparently represents.

I would have to say yes. And don't forget, any TrueHD track on the disc is required to have a DD+ track along with it for players that only decode 2 channels of the DTHD track. So again, if the DD+ track is THAT good, and all indications are that it is, then why waste the resources on it when you can work on other things. I do believe FilmMixer did say there was a process that goes into a DHTD track.

Doing it just to do it is not efficient. I'd rather they be efficient and get everything perfect. It appears by all reviews and accounts they did just that.



Richard also has a hatred for Dolby it seems, so I don't believe he can objectively counter anything FilmMixer says. And for me, I'll take the opinion of someone who does audio for a living.

Of course.

He admits that it is only slightly behind Dave Matthews -- arguably the BEST sounding disc on either side -- and PoTC discs..and then gives it a 4.5. :rolleyes:

Isn't a 4.5 like, really damn high? I mean for me, when you get to deciding between 4.5 and 5 my blader being full could make the difference. ;-)

Isn't a 4.5 like, really damn high? I mean for me, when you get to deciding between 4.5 and 5 my blader being full could make the difference. ;-)

Exactly! What is it about "slightly BEHIND" that you guys don't understand? If Josh detects a perceptible difference in the sound quality of Transformers compared to his reference "5" soundtracks, regardless of how small that difference is, is it rational to expect him to assign it the higest possible score? As far as I'm concerned, for any non-lossless track to get a 4.5 out of 5 in this age of lossless audio is a triumph. Why can't you guys see it as such? Talk about glass half empty mentalities.

Sorry we're getting in your way of beating a dead horse into a pile of goo.

And the topic of this thread is???????

The fact you want to belittle the rest of the forum because we don't share your pointless crusade is misguided. Step away from your obsession with specs, and your expectation that everyone should share your obsession.

Don't twist my words. I did not belittle anyone for not agreeing with me. I am just tired of the anti-blu venom and junior high mentality that goes on in this forum. I never demanded anyone had to agree with my preference for lossless.

What a lame attempt to turn me into something I'm not.

And while I completely respect FilmMixer's views, I would like to note that Richard from Nature's Journey fame, disagrees.

I would like to hear from Film Mixer's peers and see what they think. He has mentioned that when he has this argument there is no one left in the room. Does that mean his peers disagree with him? I don't know. Perhaps he can enlighten us on that.

And yet it only scores a 4 out 5 in your review. Why, because it's not lossless, thus not worthy? :rolleyes:

I dont think that is the reason

Even if does have a Hatred for Dolby, that doesn't mean he'd be wrong about lossless v. lossy -- and while FilmMixer is an expert in the field of Theater audio creation, Richard does have experience with audio tracks in the optical media realm.
Any credibility he had was smashed to bits when he started pimping his buddy's website - you know, the one selling wood platforms for your CD player to sit on, thus increasing the sound quality. Oh yeah (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=11771220&postcount=329), and explaining his friend's snake oil as genius...


Still -- what we REALLY need is a good article by the team at Audioholics, to finally put this baby to rest.
You can't actually believe *anything* would put this to rest, could you? ;) This whole lossy/lossless thing has grown to religious status - even with certifiable, undeniable truth in front of them (either way, of course!) you'd still have zealots claiming the opposite. As in my link above - people actually believe the sound coming out of a CD player is going to be affected by what type of material you put under it... no amount of science will stand in their way.

Apparently lack of space was the reason Transformers didnt get a lossless track:

"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). "

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

Have fun with it.

Apparently lack of space was the reason Transformers didnt get a lossless track"

"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). "

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

Have fun with it.

That was the right choice to make. The trade offs you get in the quality difference in audio would have been smaller than the trade offs you'd get on the video side.

And while I completely respect FilmMixer's views, I would like to note that Richard from Nature's Journey fame, disagrees.

richard has several somewhat, ummm, "interesting", opinions on sound that strain his credibility...

richard has several somewhat, ummm, "interesting", opinions on sound that strain his credibility...

I don't think it's fair to single out one person's opinion to be less valid than another's, particularly in the sense that we're in splitting hairs territory.

If people found his product lacking then I might see a reason for the bias, but as I understand it, people hold his releases in high regard so he must not be screwing up THAT badly. :-)

Ok -- again, attacking a person for their bias doesn't actually mean he's wrong. But he is, of course, not the only person who disagrees.

I'll take the smilely face as a light-hearted sign that this last paragraph really isn't meant for me -- but if you're going to quote me, at least respond to what I've said, yeah?

I can't account for fanboyism on either side, nor can I say what they will and will not believer. I'm sure there are HD DVD fanboys that won't believe the Highdefidgest review that space/bandwidth constraints were the reason for the lack of a lossless track. So be it.

I, on the other hand, have tried to come across as a a reasonable individual -- and more importantly, one that can be swayed by real evidence. I find FilmMixer's comments very persuasive -- but while persuasive, I don't find them Holy. :p Is there a possibility he can be wrong? Maybe. I trust Audioholics, so yeah, I'd love to read an article from them about this subject. I think it would be very enlightening, for me anyway.

Any credibility he had was smashed to bits when he started pimping his buddy's website - you know, the one selling wood platforms for your CD player to sit on, thus increasing the sound quality. Oh yeah (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=11771220&postcount=329), and explaining his friend's snake oil as genius...


You can't actually believe *anything* would put this to rest, could you? ;) This whole lossy/lossless thing has grown to religious status - even with certifiable, undeniable truth in front of them (either way, of course!) you'd still have zealots claiming the opposite. As in my link above - people actually believe the sound coming out of a CD player is going to be affected by what type of material you put under it... no amount of science will stand in their way.

That was the right choice to make. The trade offs you get in the quality difference in audio would have been smaller than the trade offs you'd get on the video side.

This is the part that honestly bugs me a bit -- and will sure to rile up the other side like nothing else (probably more than is warranted) -- why should we be facing tradeoffs like this already? While we may never know, it would seem that Blu-ray would not have been forced to make the similar sort of tradeoffs (then again, one could retort that most studios have avoided the kinds of extras involved because there are no profile 1.1 players -- but that still avoids the deeper question).

I don't think it's fair to single out one person's opinion to be less valid than another's, particularly in the sense that we're in splitting hairs territory.

If people found his product lacking then I might see a reason for the bias, but as I understand it, people hold his releases in high regard so he must not be screwing up THAT badly. :-)

the fact that his releases are held in high regard (and rightfully so, i might add) does not obviate the fact that *some* of his opinions (that he attempts to present as 'fact') stretch credulity...

I'll take the smilely face as a light-hearted sign that this last paragraph really isn't meant for me -- but if you're going to quote me, at least respond to what I've said, yeah?

It was for you, but just making a broad general statement about fanboyism/whatever - wrapped up with a smiley for light-heartedness :). I took your comment to mean "Give me a article by Audioholics that says definitively one way or another if any human, computer, or duck can tell the difference between lossy and lossless on ANY system... so we can put this to rest." I'm just saying - even if that review existed, it would fall on deaf ears. So to speak.

Apparently lack of space was the reason Transformers didnt get a lossless track:

"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). "

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

Have fun with it.


You sure about that?

Transformers
144 Min

Troy
162 Min
*has lossless track

Departed
151 Min
*has lossless track

Superman
154 min
*has lossless track

***BTW Your "quote" is not a direct quote from paramount.

I listened to this soundtrack last night and thought it was easily one of the best I've heard to date on either format. Not lacking in any respect. I doubt anyone would be disappointed.

Apparently lack of space was the reason Transformers didnt get a lossless track:

"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). "

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

Have fun with it.
Not much there to "have fun" with, there are movies longer than this on HD DVD with lossless tracks. Point blank someones either lying, misinformed of just confused.

From the review:
Note that although I'm giving this audio mix five stars, that doesn't mean I agree with Paramount's decision to forgo high-res audio on this title. Without a TrueHD or PCM mix to compare this one to, there's no way of telling how much better such a track might have been, but based on the upgrade I've seen with other titles, I'm guessing a high-res mix could well have trounced this one. That's not to take anything away from this truly exceptional mix, but this is one case where I think you truly can improve upon perfection.
I suppose I have a different definition of "high-res". And 'guessing' about what it could have been? Just another reason lossless should be included, so we don't have people 'guessing' about "what could have been".

If it was truly left off due to size limitations, that makes me kinda bummed for my format of choice. :(

You sure about that?

Transformers
144 Min

Troy
162 Min
*has lossless track

Departed
151 Min
*has lossless track

Superman
154 min
*has lossless track

***BTW Your "quote" is not a direct quote from paramount.

You forgot

Troy DC
196 Min
*Has Lossless track

That movie is 3 Hours 16 minutes long and is approximately 36% longer then Transformers. I would think that almost an hours more of video would take up much more space then 3 hours of audio. Specially considering at the length of the movie on one disc it still got 4 1/2 stars in video.

I have to admit I am amazed a few things this poll is showing.

1.) How many have already seen the movie on HD DVD

2.) How many people have chosen option 4!? Fully admiting they are upset that the poll is proving that all the BS posts about how bad DD+ was going to be was only a way for BD supporterts to bring down the hype. I expected a few people to vote but to have it be the 2nd most popular vote?

3.) I am suprised at how many people have chosen option 3 and said the DD+ track was dissapointing. I m surprised at this becuase of two things.

a.) When I check the post history of those who voted there there is no post from them saying they watched the movie. Odly they all seem to have a BD slnt in their post history. I guess they didnt realize this is a public poll?

b.) Its true I have not yet heard the movie and will not know for sure until i do, but with most people (professional reviewers) saying its a 5/5 for AQ which is better then almost ALL movies with lossless tracks I am shocked to see people say this movie was dissapointing int the area of AQ.

You all forget that Warner uses 16-bit TrueHD tracks, which have an average of around 1.6 (Batman Begins) to 1.8 (Happy Feet) Mbps. However, 24-bits tracks, which Paramount uses, are around 3.2 (Next) to 3.5 (Top Gun) Mbps. Since Michael Bay movies are pretty loud, maybe the TrueHD for Transformers is around 4 Mbps, which is 2.5 more than the 1.5 DD+ track. And the question is whether a 1.5Mbps 24 bits DD+ track sounds better or worse than a 16 bits TrueHD track ...

I have to admit I am amazed a few things this poll is showing.

I'm going to take a wild guess here and assume that a large number of them either: 1. didn't bother to read the "Those who have seen it" part or 2. they're not going to let that get in the way of their bias.

I'm going to take a wild guess here and assume that a large number of them either: 1. didn't bother to read the "Those who have seen it" part or 2. they're not going to let that get in the way of their bias.

and/or they did not realize its a public poll.

I'm going to take a wild guess here and assume that a large number of them either: 1. didn't bother to read the "Those who have seen it" part or 2. they're not going to let that get in the way of their bias.

Such as Beatboy77's long held bias for HD DVD? :)

I have to admit I am amazed a few things this poll is showing.

1.) How many have already seen the movie on HD DVD

2.) How many people have chosen option 4!? Fully admiting they are upset that the poll is proving that all the BS posts about how bad DD+ was going to be was only a way for BD supporterts to bring down the hype. I expected a few people to vote but to have it be the 2nd most popular vote?

3.) I am suprised at how many people have chosen option 3 and said the DD+ track was dissapointing. I m surprised at this becuase of two things.

a.) When I check the post history of those who voted there there is no post from them saying they watched the movie. Odly they all seem to have a BD slnt in their post history. I guess they didnt realize this is a public poll?

b.) Its true I have not yet heard the movie and will not know for sure until i do, but with most people (professional reviewers) saying its a 5/5 for AQ which is better then almost ALL movies with lossless tracks I am shocked to see people say this movie was dissapointing int the area of AQ.

considering most ppl have not seen/heard the movie yet, option 4 is the only viable choice. it does seem like plenty of ppl who havent seen the movie voted based on their bias, or simply didnt see that you are asking those who have seen it. you might just want to repost later this week, prob should have put "for those who have seen Transformers HD DVD" as the title.

If it was truly left off due to size limitations, that makes me kinda bummed for my format of choice. :(

Yes it does! For me it is getting more and more difficult to stay HD-DVD exclusive.

You all forget that Warner uses 16-bit TrueHD tracks, which have an average of around 1.6 (Batman Begins) to 1.8 (Happy Feet) Mbps. However, 24-bits tracks, which Paramount uses, are around 3.2 (Next) to 3.5 (Top Gun) Mbps. Since Michael Bay movies are pretty loud, maybe the TrueHD for Transformers is around 4 Mbps, which is 2.5 more than the 1.5 DD+ track. And the question is whether a 1.5Mbps 24 bits DD+ track sounds better or worse than a 16 bits TrueHD track ...

another issue with Dolby TrueHD is the need to still include a DD+ track on the disc, esp a 1.5mbps one, which can really put a hurtin' on the capacity.

Maybe Transformers has higher bitrate then Troy.

Yes it does! For me it is getting more and more difficult to stay HD-DVD exclusive.

well the fact that this is hd dvd only makes it difficult to stay blu-ray exclusive also. bottom line seems all the early adopters are going to need 2 players, i'll buy a dual format one when prices drop below $500. all the ppl still on the side lines should prob wait for dual format players as well.

And the question is whether a 1.5Mbps 24 bits DD+ track sounds better or worse than a 16 bits TrueHD track ...

I don't believe that is the right question to ask. It should be "whether a 1.5Mbps DD+ that is identical in bits to the original master sounds better or worse than a TrueHD track that is identical in bits to the original master".

Maybe Transformers has higher bitrate then Troy.

captain obvious! :D

basically warner compromises video bitrate to include lossless audio and paramount compromises lossless audio for higher video bitrate.

I am just tired of the anti-blu venom and junior high mentality that goes on in this forum.

Simple really, leave this part of the forum!! Got it? It'll do your mind good. It IS the Internet after all...

It was for you, but just making a broad general statement about fanboyism/whatever - wrapped up with a smiley for light-heartedness :). I took your comment to mean "Give me a article by Audioholics that says definitively one way or another if any human, computer, or duck can tell the difference between lossy and lossless on ANY system... so we can put this to rest." I'm just saying - even if that review existed, it would fall on deaf ears. So to speak.

Now we're just getting a bit over the top here -- ha. I'm not concerned with whether computers nor ducks can tell the difference between lossy and lossless. But I do think that A/V enthusiast websites or magazines would be quality sources for testing the theory on whether PEOPLE can tell the difference, like MANY reviewers of HD media think they can hear.

I'm sure that some people wouldn't believe -- and that's fine, but I'm not that person. And unless you can cite occasions contrary, what's the point of quoting me for that fanboyism attitude?

What you WILL hear/read me say, is that even if there are NO differences, it would be smart marketing to include lossless tracks anyway -- as FilmMixer has agreed.

Film length is not the only factor here -- the number of extras involved is what alleged to have created the space crunch, not the length of the movies alone.

You forgot

Troy DC
196 Min
*Has Lossless track

That movie is 3 Hours 16 minutes long and is approximately 36% longer then Transformers. I would think that almost an hours more of video would take up much more space then 3 hours of audio. Specially considering at the length of the movie on one disc it still got 4 1/2 stars in video.

I would like to hear from Film Mixer's peers and see what they think. He has mentioned that when he has this argument there is no one left in the room. Does that mean his peers disagree with him? I don't know. Perhaps he can enlighten us on that.

I am not a peer of Filmmixer, however I work with audio everyday. (I write music for commercials and other small video projects.) I have a degree in music composition with an emphasis on electronic music. So take my opinion as is.

In the world of audio the farther away from the source, (live vocalist or instrumentalist) you go the more of a loss of fidelity you will encounter. When we take a recording for a live jazz combo, for example, there isn't much processing involved. Only with great mics, an excellent room, and great mic positioning, can the best results be achieved. For a more modern recording of sampled instruments and electronic synthesis, subtle qualities of the original recording are lost. This is just from regular audio processing such as audio compression, limiters, expanders, reverb, delay, and even distortion. All of these things can be added multiple times on multiple tracks of a mix. I am really oversimplifying this, but once all the audio has been processed for a HT mix, much of the missing bits that are gained with LPCM at high sampling rates are thrown out by the normal audio mixing process anyway.

YMMV.

basically warner compromises video bitrate to include lossless audio and paramount compromises lossless audio for higher video bitrate.
If this is the case, then Paramount would be making the right choice for the average HD-DVD supporter.

Simple really, leave this part of the forum!! Got it? It'll do your mind good. It IS the Internet after all...

Thanks for proving my point.

I listened to this soundtrack last night and thought it was easily one of the best I've heard to date on either format. Not lacking in any respect. I doubt anyone would be disappointed.


Comically enough though, the people who are the most "disappointed" and keep flogging multiple dead horses over this issue in multiple threads...over...and over...and over... are people who base everything on a bit meter, a bullet-point on a package...and most hilariously of all...people who own NEITHER format.

Just for the record....

My hi-def collection:

HD-DVD: 105
Blu-Ray: 170

Opps... updated sig :p

another issue with Dolby TrueHD is the need to still include a DD+ track on the disc, esp a 1.5mbps one, which can really put a hurtin' on the capacity.There is no "need" to do this... it's not mandatory for HD DVD media. As I recently mentioned again in another thread, all HD DVD players can decode TrueHD to at least stereo... with the 1st gen LG combo being the only player I know of that doesn't support multi-channel TrueHD. It's up to the disc's author... but it would be a waste to include an identical 1.5Mbps DD+ track with TrueHD, too. (I'd stick to 640Kbps or below.)

Opps... updated sig :p

Love the sig...great way to stick it to all these thread jackers that want to tear down the TF HDDVD because it was a killer DD+ track.

I opened up this thread to vote, and found that I can not. The poll is par for the course around here, unfortunately. The choices are meant to support an agenda, not to actually determine opinion of AVS posters. Please, try to write a decent poll.


What are your thoughts on the DD+ track of Transformers (only if you have seen it)

Surpassed my expectations and I feel it is on par with many lossless PCM and TrueHD tracks.
Met expectations. Better then regular D D but not as good as any lossless track I have heard.
All the hype about how poor the DD+ track was going to be is correct. It was dissapointing.
I hate this poll. Proves the trash talk re DD+ was just to bring down the excitement of this HD DVD.


I can not choose #1, nor #2. The soundtrack did not exceed my expectations, sounding very good, and I feel it is on par with most TrueHD tracks. IMO, most DD+ soundtracks are on par with TrueHD tracks. But on par does not mean they are equal. My friends, family, random visitors, and I have consistently preferred TrueHD versus DD+ soundtracks in blind listening where a movie included both. But the difference are very small, and subtle. A good DD+ sound track is on par with a good TrueHD, but I still prefer the TrueHD track. In this case, there is no TrueHD track to compare to, so I will never know which is preferred.

I also wanted to choose #4, since this poll is poorly made. But trash talking prior to this poll has nothing to do with why I hate the poll. Had you made this multiple choice, I would have chosen 1,2, and 4. Even then, that would have been incorrect. Instead, try poll options like the following:

What are your thoughts on the DD+ track of Transformers (only if you have seen it)

Surpassed my expectations
Met my expectations
Disappointing
I hate this poll

Can't DD+ go up to 3 mbps on HD DVD?

I opened up this thread to vote, and found that I can not. The poll is par for the course around here, unfortunately. The choices are meant to support an agenda, not to actually determine opinion of AVS posters. Please, try to write a decent poll.

My friends, family, random visitors, and I have consistently preferred TrueHD versus DD+ soundtracks in blind listening where a movie included both. But the difference are very small, and subtle. A good DD+ sound track is on par with a good TrueHD, but I still prefer the TrueHD track. In this case, there is no TrueHD track to compare to, so I will never know which is preferred.


I will admit part of this poll has an agenda and that is to point out that people posted trash talk about this release's audio prior to the release in order to bring down the hype. This was fueled purely by jelousy.

The other three choices are fair IMO.

A good DD+ sound track is on par with a good TrueHD, but I still prefer the TrueHD track.

Generally speeaking I agree with you in that most lossless track are better then DD+. In the world of high end audio differences are "small and subtle", but enthusiasts describe small and subtle as if they were milestones and use more larger more dramatics words to describe the differences. Bottom line is that even with a reference system a lossless track will sound better then a DD+ most of the time, but those differences wont be night an day or huge.


Reading your post i would say option 1 best suits you. Why? You mentioned DD+ normally does not sound as good as lossless and in this case it did hence surpassing your normal expectation.


BTW...believe it or not option 4 was written as a cheeky choke to point out the people who would be upset by my poll which I believe would clearly show the audio on this movie woul kick butt. I honestly never expected people to vote for it...certainly did not expect it to become the 2d most popular post.

I am just watching this movie and I have to say that the audio is great!!! No complaints here...

I'm happy to read your guy's opinions, I originally came uninformed about what DD+ even was and was disapointed that Transformers would not have TrueHD. I still don't have HDDVD but I will very soon and now I will for sure have Transformers (actually its already shipping to me before I even buy an hddvd player!!). I thank others in other threads that educated me on DD+ vs TrueHD and how just because its not lossless it doesn't mean its inferior, especially to some of us who aren't crazy audiophiles anyways. I will answer this poll sometime in Nov once Canada gets the new A3* Toshibas and I can watch this movie!! Until then enjoy it, all the reviews give the DD+ amazing 4or 5 stars out of 5.

I'm sure that some people wouldn't believe -- and that's fine, but I'm not that person. And unless you can cite occasions contrary, what's the point of quoting me for that fanboyism attitude?"
I certainly didn't mean to imply fanboyism or anything, just for the record - I've always found your posts to be fairly well thought out and level headed. I was just responding to the "we" in:

"Still -- what we REALLY need is a good article by the team at Audioholics, to finally put this baby to rest."

...and just saying that although that might put your mind at ease, it will do ZERO for many many of the zealots here that think their "Well, my friend and I heard a difference. Level matching? Huh?" posts carry any weight at all - much like the scaesare test(s) or anything at audioholics/etc won't change their opinions. OTOH, I have no doubt you are/would be influenced by such scientific tests and their outcomes.

What you WILL hear/read me say, is that even if there are NO differences, it would be smart marketing to include lossless tracks anyway -- as FilmMixer has agreed.
Agreed. (Like most of your views...) :)

I am just watching this movie and I have to say that the audio is great!!! No complaints here...

You're watching it and you're on your computer at the same time?

Yep...have computer in next room and just walked over to type this...

Wow the DD+ on this title sounds so full and dynamic...no doubt about it this is REFERENCE quality. Very happy! ;) Enjoy!

No matter how "reference" a 1.5 kbps lossy soundtrack may seem in the absence of the PCM master to compare, a LOSSESS encoding would sound noticably better were it available... and reveal how the previous "reference" accolades of the lossy track were in error.

Test this against virtually any HD DVD or BD title that contains both lossless and lossy audio options. I have yet to hear a lossless encode of *any* disc on either format that didn't sound more natural, nuanced, detailed, and dyanmic than its lossy counterpart.

Let's try to avoid pretending the lossless encoding doesn't offer benefits to come to a particular format's/title's defense. Folks tried to pretend that 720p maximized the limites of human vision when they felt bad about their 720p projector investment being threatened by new 1080p designs. Can't we rise above this cycle of pretending?

well since I only have the the xbox hd-dvd add on I guess I wont know :(

I'm sure what I can hear will be good enough.

No matter how "reference" a 1.5 kbps lossy soundtrack may seem in the absence of the PCM master to compare, a LOSSESS encoding would sound noticably better were it available... and reveal how the previous "reference" accolades of the lossy track were in error.

Test this against virtually any HD DVD or BD title that contains both lossless and lossy audio options. I have yet to hear a lossless encode of *any* disc on either format that didn't sound more natural, nuanced, detailed, and dyanmic than its lossy counterpart.

Let's try to avoid pretending the lossless encoding doesn't offer benefits to come to a particular format's/title's defense. Folks tried to pretend that 720p maximized the limites of human vision when they felt bad about their 720p projector investment being threatened by new 1080p designs. Can't we rise above this cycle of pretending?

A.) You don't know if this movie can sound better you just can' because the choice is not available. To say you know it would sound better is completely wrong.

B.) Just about every movie with TrueHD only has a 640k DD+ track so any comparison would be hard.

C.) Considering that most TrueHD tracks are 16bit tracks and This 1.5MBs uses a 24bit track this could actually sound a lot better then if a TruHD track was included.

D.) No one said it doesn't offer benefits over DD+ or that DD+ sounds better. But to say TrueHD absolutely would sound better is unfounded. It is just as likely that there wasn't a discernible difference. That is what matters, not that a bit is missing but that it sounds like it was meant to sound.

A.) You don't know if this movie can sound better you just can' because the choice is not available. To say you know it would sound better is completely wrong.


David Boulet has been completely wrong about many things audio related, not just now, but going back a long time. That's never stopped him from repeating his same mantra.

Keep at it Dave (Quixote).

Transformers sounds fabulous to my ears. Paramount have a habit of creating the best lossy tracks, and although a lossless track would've been the icing on the robot, this DD+ track kicks all kinds of ass. There's deep, nuanced bass, an immersive soundfield, clear dialogue (unlike the theatrical presentation I saw in Leicester Square) and crisp music.

This track is a winner, and worryingly I find myself agreeing with HDD again. It's five stars all the way and although it could (in theory :D) be improved upon with lossless, I'm more than happy with what we've got.

Folks tried to pretend that 720p maximized the limites of human vision when they felt bad about their 720p projector investment being threatened by new 1080p designs.

Pixel resolution is not analogous to compression.

OMG!!! :eek: This is the best sounding movie I have heard in a LONG LONG time!! Of the 350+ High Def titles I have in my collection this IS the best sounding movie I own. The whole movie is reference and I give it Two thumbs and two big toes up. WOW!

I think it sounds awesome , maybe it could be better with a TrueHD track but I am not going to complain one bit about the audio ( now the Video is another story as I feel it is a bit lacking in certain parts even for a long movie , look at what they did with Kong ) . I am not saying the Video is bad just that it is not THE reference disc that I was hoping for ;) .

--- Jason

Have to agree with almost everyone here...

From what I have heard so far from this disc, it's the BEST damn soundtrack I have heard from BOTH formats... PCM, TrueHD, or otherwize. While a lossless track would have made this release perfection, it's really hard to believe that it could get any better than the DD+ track that is currently on this disc.

AQ and VQ are 10's in my book!!!

I dont know how much better it would sound if it were lossless, but I CAN say that the Sound is fabulous- without a doubt.

Picture was also VVG, not perfect everywhere, but damn good IMO.

I wasn't even sure I'd like the movie- but it was actually decent(I like action stuff), some really corny stuff, but for the most part a solid Movie Experience.. sound really helped out quite a bit IMO...

Watch those subs!!!!

one thing about the PQ is this is how it's suppose to look. I saw the movie twice in the theaters and it looks exactly like how I remember seeing it. WOW I'm still amazed!

Will I get the DD+ track from my 360 add on drive?

So if you're using a xbox 360 add-on (optical audio) and an older 5.1 reciever that doesn't "Support" trueHD/dd+, which audio track do you use? For some reason trueHD track and 360 set to DTS sounded best to me *shrug*

would really like an answer to this question!

No matter how "reference" a 1.5 kbps lossy soundtrack may seem in the absence of the PCM master to compare, a LOSSESS encoding would sound noticably better were it available... and reveal how the previous "reference" accolades of the lossy track were in error.

Test this against virtually any HD DVD or BD title that contains both lossless and lossy audio options. I have yet to hear a lossless encode of *any* disc on either format that didn't sound more natural, nuanced, detailed, and dyanmic than its lossy counterpart.

Let's try to avoid pretending the lossless encoding doesn't offer benefits to come to a particular format's/title's defense. Folks tried to pretend that 720p maximized the limites of human vision when they felt bad about their 720p projector investment being threatened by new 1080p designs. Can't we rise above this cycle of pretending?I'm not pretending anything...as stated REFERENCE audio IMO. I AM HAPPY WITH THE AUDIO ON THIS TITLE...there you go Dave. :D

Just wanted to quickly add my opinion-

Just watched Transformers. The sound on this disc is the best sound I've heard on a disc. ever. So all the little ******* need to stop whining.

I still think "Tokyo drift" has the best audio on hddvd so far including TrueHD tracks, "transformers" is up there with "hot fuzz" though.

we're watching this tomorrow night but I couldn't help but give a quick skip through. the sound is amazing from what I heard.

No matter how "reference" a 1.5 kbps lossy soundtrack may seem in the absence of the PCM master to compare, a LOSSESS encoding would sound noticably better were it available... and reveal how the previous "reference" accolades of the lossy track were in error.

Test this against virtually any HD DVD or BD title that contains both lossless and lossy audio options. I have yet to hear a lossless encode of *any* disc on either format that didn't sound more natural, nuanced, detailed, and dyanmic than its lossy counterpart.

Let's try to avoid pretending the lossless encoding doesn't offer benefits to come to a particular format's/title's defense. Folks tried to pretend that 720p maximized the limites of human vision when they felt bad about their 720p projector investment being threatened by new 1080p designs. Can't we rise above this cycle of pretending?

Filmfixer is offering a challenge and lunch to anyone who still asserts that the AQ is discernable.

Have you heard of the lossless audio track of Transformers? Do you think it made a huge difference?

I've browsed through a few scenes and I have to say as well, this is an outstanding soundtrack. Immersive soundstage, deep bass, and clarity. The weekend cant come soon enough to watch it fully.

Transformers sounds amazing to my ears. This HD DVD's DD+ track delivers the extremely immersive experience that I went in expecting from this movie. This track is more fitting to the content than almost every master quality track that I have heard on either format. I cannot ask for anything more from a sound quality standpoint, and I'm certainly not going to let any blowhard who hasn't even viewed this HD DVD tell me otherwise. The audio delivered here is without a doubt reference.

Filmfixer is offering a challenge and lunch to anyone who still asserts that the AQ is discernable.

Have you heard of the lossless audio track of Transformers? Do you think it made a huge difference?

Give me equal 16bit/24bit/other TrueHD and DD+ tracks of any movie, and let me listen to them for a while. Then I can tell you if there is a discernible difference. Of the existing disks I have watched with both TrueHD and DD+, the differences are detectable. Since we have no Transformers TrueHD track to listen to, we have no way of knowing if there is an audible difference.

On a side topic from various posts in this thread, why do people associate "enjoyable" with "reference" for movie sound tracks? When did reference audio start meaning your favorite audio track?

Give me equal 16bit/24bit/other TrueHD and DD+ tracks of any movie, and let me listen to them for a while. Then I can tell you if there is a discernible difference. Of the existing disks I have watched with both TrueHD and DD+, the differences are detectable. Since we have no Transformers TrueHD track to listen to, we have no way of knowing if there is an audible difference.

When a disk has a TrueHD track, the DD+ usually isn't 1.5 MB, it's usually like 640k, not the kind of comparison we're really talking about.

Wow, it was really good. Not as loud as I would have liked. Fantastic 5.1 mixing on this track.

How bout and Option:
"It's real good, but i'd still prefer peice of mind in knowing it's lossless"

I was really impressed with the audio. Too bad my a-35 has a problem with losing sound and video for 1-2 seconds, but yeah the audio was very impressive.

Awesome soundtrack! Just got done watching the entire thing. I'd put it right up there with some of the best lossless tacks I've heard (be it HD or BD). Truly an experience.

Tight DEEP bass at times without being overdone, and great surround and vocal clarity as well!

For reference, here's my audio setup:

Onkyo 885 pre/pro set to THX Ultra 2
Adcom GFA-5500 powering Klipsch KLF-30 mains
Adcom GFA-7500 powering Center Speaker (Klipsch KLF-C7) and 4 Surrounds (Klipsch RS-3 Dipoles)
2 Crown CE-2000 (1920W bridged each) feeding a pair of TC Sound 18" drivers in 400 liter cabinets

So just over 5000W RMS worth of amps feeding into speakers/subs capable of handling all of it without breaking a sweat. I never got the sense that the audio was "lossy", nor lacking in dynamic range. The noise floor was also below ambient at all times.

This 1.5Mbps DD+ sound track leaves nothing behind as far as I can tell.

isn't DD+ less compressed then sound used at the theater?

Awesome soundtrack! Just got done watching the entire thing. I'd put it right up there with some of the best lossless tacks I've heard (be it HD or BD). Truly an experience.

Tight DEEP bass at times without being overdone, and great surround and vocal clarity as well!

For reference, here's my audio setup:

Onkyo 885 pre/pro set to THX Ultra 2
Adcom GFA-5500 powering Klipsch KLF-30 mains
Adcom GFA-7500 powering Center Speaker (Klipsch KLF-C7) and 4 Surrounds (Klipsch RS-3 Dipoles)
2 Crown CE-2000 (1920W bridged each) feeding a pair of TC Sound 18" drivers in 400 liter cabinets

So just over 5000W RMS worth of amps feeding into speakers/subs capable of handling all of it without breaking a sweat. I never got the sense that the audio was "lossy", nor lacking in dynamic range. The noise floor was also below ambient at all times.

This 1.5Mbps DD+ sound track leaves nothing behind as far as I can tell.

:eek:

Umm, may I come watch Transformers at your house? Please?

:D

Filmfixer is offering a challenge and lunch to anyone who still asserts that the AQ is discernable.

Have you heard of the lossless audio track of Transformers? Do you think it made a huge difference?

What's filmfixer's criteria for determining whether or not a listener has accurately discerned whether a lossy track is inferior to a lossless track? I guess you'd have to do a blind test and require the listener to not only identify which track is the lossless one, but also point out instances in the lossy audio where compression compromised the sound in some way compared to the lossless. You'd then have to have a test administrator somehow be able to look at the bitstream (or maybe just bitrate of the lossless track) to see if there was more data in that particular spot that was compressed out of the track. For instance, you'd have to have someone identify a timecode where he feels the lossless track is noticeably superior to the lossy one, and then, at the very least, check the bitrate of the lossless track at that point to see if there's a spike. Otherwise, I don't know how you would be able to prove that someone didn't just sit down with an empty belly and an empty pocket and claim to hear all sorts of audio detail that isn't really there.

This poll is only open to people who have watched Transformers on HD DVD and listened to the DD+ sound track. BD exclusive owners who have not seen the movie need not vote.

Lets find out what everyone thinks about the quality of the DD + track. Lord knows there we 100s of posts from a ton of AVS members trashing how this was going to sound. Many said they would rather buy the SD DVD because it didnt have Lossless.


Well lets see shall we.

My kids and I just finished watching this marvel of a movie, it was truly awesome in every sense of the word. :)
The PQ and AQ are a perfect 10/10 to us. This is now truly one of my top 10 HD movies. :)

This has a lot more discrete sound than what I remember in theaters.:)

Probably the best sounding disc ever. But at louder levels Megan Fox's voice and Jon Voight's sound a little 'compressed'. Weird. everthing esle sounded perfect.

Ironhide's cannon whirl is wicked. This one even sounds better than The Matrix. But the bass isn't boomy at all. I listened to Day After Tomorrow before(thanks CC). It's good, but it's not nearly as tight and crisp as transformers.

Better than Star Wars.(at least until I hear a lightsaber in DTSMA)


I still cant believe Uni has been putting DD+ instead of True HD because of space limitations. King Kong would definently benefit.

For those of you with the xbox add-on, do you set your xbox audio to dolby digital or DTS?

This has a lot more discrete sound than what I remember in theaters.:)

Probably the best sounding disc ever. But at louder levels Megan Fox's voice and Jon Voight's sound a little 'compressed'. Weird. everthing esle sounded perfect.

Ironhide's cannon whirl is wicked. This one even sounds better than The Matrix. But the bass isn't boomy at all. I listened to Day After Tomorrow before(thanks CC). It's good, but it's not nearly as tight and crisp as transformers.

Better than Star Wars.(at least until I hear a lightsaber in DTSMA)


I still cant believe Uni has been putting DD+ instead of True HD because of space limitations. King Kong would definently benefit.

Might sound dumb when I ask you this but what did you mean by compressed??

There was a scene or two in the movie where it was sounding kinda like a popping noise after they would talk but on select scenes.

Might sound dumb when I ask you this but what did you mean by compressed??



Kind of like that sound when someone takes an Mp3 and re-encodes it into mp4 to save space. sort of like they recorded the sound in a booth in front of a mic.

I haven't had the luxury of listening to it yet since I got home late and can't blast my system.

But I am still under the strong assumption that if there were a lossless track, the only noticeable difference would be a wider dynamic range.

I didn't watch the entire movie, but I jumped around on the disc and was very, very impressed with the audio. Seemed like aside from rocking the house, the dialouge was incredibly clear.

That being said, it did seem like I had to crank it a bit more than some other discs, but that could have been a result of how happy I was just being able to watch this movie in my own theater.

Kind of like that sound when someone takes an Mp3 and re-encodes it into mp4 to save space. sort of like they recorded the sound in a booth in front of a mic.

Yeah thats what it sounded like to me as well but only on one or two scenes. For a minute I thought this movie blew out my center speaker :eek: I still can't believe how good this movie is all around. Thank you Paramount!

Nice Poll!!!!!!

It is exactly what I expected!

DD+ has been called many negative things by ignorant people who belong to AVsForum. The main culprit being the BR fanboys who think DTS-HDMA, PCM and DTHD are the holy grail of audio. I have been saying for the last year that if DD+ is encoded correctly it can sound as good as anything ever put on a disk! If anyone can demonstrate to me how anything can sound better than Transformers using DD+, I dare them. It is that good! Dolby Digital is about the fidelity and quality with the lowest amount of bits to get there. Sometimes the studios get it right, and most of the time they don't. This time, Paramount hit it out of the park! Cheers!
Of course people don't want to hear that, especially BR fanboys! It is a shame that people on AVSforum can only see bits instead of what is real and tangible. Anyone with a good ear and little knowledge can tell how good DD+ can sound.

This track will shut up a lot of the "give me lossless or give me death" people. It is one of my favorite audio tracks. It made my sub do things it has never done before!!??!! In a good way.

For those of you with the xbox add-on, do you set your xbox audio to dolby digital or DTS?

dts for me. I played around with it, and the dts gives you more range than the dolby. On my set-up.

I see now how this movie pulled 5/5 AQ for the hd dvd. The movie has easily one of most sound instensive audio tracks ever, thoroughly working every speaker in all ranges, and it all sounds great.:)

Definitley hear more at home than I ever did in the theater and it wasn't shabby in the digital theater I watched in it either.

B.) Just about every movie with TrueHD only has a 640k DD+ track so any comparison would be hard.


Why would they do that? Is is a space issue? Or is it to make it impossible for us to do a direct comparison? What are they trying to hide?

I was one of the many who almost threw a fit when Paramount announced the disc would only carry DD+.

After viewing the disc, I withdraw my annoyance. It was a bombardment of audio delight! Fantastic track.

Amazed at the (now 15) voters who were supposedly disappointed with the audio. Check their posting histories if you want a laugh... I especially liked the one who commented "Its better than average, but I've heard better." - which doesn't quite match "All the hype about how poor the DD+ track was going to be is correct. It was dissapointing." :rolleyes: Then he goes on to say he wishes there was TrueHD track included. Oh, and he's using the 360 add-on. Incredible.

I think the cannon flip over the screaming woman about toasted my sub , the excursion there had to be pushing my 15" sub as far as it has ever been pushed ( very intense at reference levels but scared me and I probably will not push it that hard again ;) ) .

The more I listen to the audio on this disc the more impressed I become .

--- Jason

The whole damn disc is geekalicious!!!

I just finished watching it. I must say that the sound did meet, and most likely exceed, my expectations. It was on my HD A1 hooked up to my Sunfire TG III pre/pro via the 5.1 analogue outputs. Lossless or not......it was a great sounding disc.

WOW !!!!!!!!!!! I would watch it again but it's late here in Georgia.

Transformers Audio?

HighDefDigest
5 stars/5 stars

TVPredictions
5 stars/5 stars

DVDTown
10/10

DVDTalk
5 stars/5 stars

HighDefDiscNews
5 stars/5 starsPretty much sums it up. That being said, I still have to frown upon Paramount for not offering a lossless track. An HD release should mean HD audio too.

Met my expectations and I feel it is superior to many lossless PCM and TrueHD tracks.

ie.

I had high expectations for the audio quality, and I wasn't disappointed. None of the post options conveys that sentiment though, so I had to vote for option 4 unfortunately.

P.S. I think I have to rethink my metal shelving. It was quite annoying - rattling during the movie.

I think the cannon flip over the screaming woman about toasted my sub , the excursion there had to be pushing my 15" sub as far as it has ever been pushed ( very intense at reference levels but scared me and I probably will not push it that hard again ;) ) .

The more I listen to the audio on this disc the more impressed I become .

--- Jason

Same here. That entire scene is just awesome to me. My lil Velodyne has handled it well but I wish I had more :D

I was expecting more based on the reviews. I think that many of the people giving this perfect scores just love the title and are curving their scores up because of the film. Still a must buy IMHO.

Just curious, but what more were you expecting? It matches (or bests) the theatrical presentation.

Why would they do that? Is is a space issue? Or is it to make it impossible for us to do a direct comparison? What are they trying to hide?

Not a space issue. Its just that Warner is by far the company using TrueHD the most and they almost always use 640k. But keep in mind that while we can all decode TrueHD all movies are required to have a DD+ track. That means That they have to have to full audio tracks if they want to include TrueHD. For something like this why include two tracks that sound Identical, so they choose to save space and cut the DD+ track down or decide that the DD+ 1.5 is good enough.

Universal is a perfect example of this. They released a couple TrueHD movies early, but stopped completely and just used 1.5 DD+. I think they decided that their 24bit 1.5 mbs dd+ process was better then the 16bit TrueHD process they and everyone else has been using.

Just curious, but what more were you expecting? It matches (or bests) the theatrical presentation.

I was expecting to be blown away like I was when I first watched King Kong on HD-DVD.

Surpassed my expectations!!!!!!!!!!!!
Boy I'm glad I did'nt waste money renting this yesterday, this is a definate keeper and my new reference disc. Stunning throughout.:D:D I'm still grinning this morning and can't wait to watch it again.
When this is released in lossless I can see a double dip here. Maybe the studio can release a bare bones, ala "superbit" edition with no extras, just DTHD and keep the price under 25 bones.;)

Universal is a perfect example of this. They released a couple TrueHD movies early, but stopped completely and just used 1.5 DD+. I think they decided that their 24bit 1.5 mbs dd+ process was better then the 16bit TrueHD process they and everyone else has been using.

And yet now they have gone back to releasing TrueHD.

And yet now they have gone back to releasing TrueHD.

Under my belief that they were tired of the unfounded criticism of not releasing TrueHD tracks. Both Paramount and Uni are starting to do the same thing. Stupid Placebo effect if you ask me.

I was expecting to be blown away like I was when I first watched King Kong on HD-DVD.

Funny thing is, King Kong is the first EVER HD DVD that I watched and I wast terribly impressed with it. Oh well.

For something like this why include two tracks that sound Identical, so they choose to save space and cut the DD+ track down or decide that the DD+ 1.5 is good enough.


So it is a space issue?

Funny thing is, King Kong is the first EVER HD DVD that I watched and I wast terribly impressed with it. Oh well.

I really didn't care for Kong the movie all that much, but the audio really came to life during the action scenes. TF is a much better film, but I personally wouldn't say the audio is better than Kong or as good as PotC:DMC. I don't have a reference quality system, so I can only compare what I heard from TF with other titles using what I have.

I really didn't care for Kong the movie all that much, but the audio really came to life during the action scenes. TF is a much better film, but I personally wouldn't say the audio is better than Kong or as good as PotC:DMC. I don't have a reference quality system, so I can only compare what I heard from TF with other titles using what I have.

Ive actually only watched KK once, so I need to watch it again. Ive redone a couple of things with my audio system so it may be a different experience the 2nd time around.

I'm EXTREMELY upset with the audio track on this release. I had stopped buying HD-DVD with the Matrix collection because I thought they were destined to fail, but I simply had to own this title in HD, no matter which format. I put it in and started watching and was shocked that there was absolutely NO LFE in this movie at all. I've watched plenty of TrueHD and DD+ movies on HD-DVD with my analog setup and they have given me no problems to date - PLENTY of bass, especially on movies like the Matrix. But this one was just shocking - my gain lights didn't show input signal hardly at all throughout the entire movie, even though I turned my sub channel up and had the volume at near THX reference level (SPL calibrated). I thought the problem might be the analog signal, so I switched to digital via coaxial to have the decoding done in my receiver and it made no difference. Interestingly, it really seemed that the whole soundtrack was very quiet - I had to turn the volume up significantly higher than all other titles I own just to hear conversations at a reasonable level - and this was not because of dynamic range, either.

Am I really the only one experiencing this? It's enough to make me think the SD-DVD would have been the better choice. Then again, it could have had the same problems.

Edit: not that it's germane to this discussion, but I did feel the picture quality was beyond compare. It was just as good as any of the Matrix disc and any Blu-Ray disc I own. Absolutely phenomenal.

That doesnt make any sense. On my setup, this HD DVD is LOADED with LFE!

So, if you're listening to this track with a subwoofer up pretty loud (and it sounds like most people are), then chances are that even if you had a lossless version of the track to compare to, there's almost no way you could tell the difference. Subs really do a LOT of masking of the finer details in audio. If you really want to do a fair comparison between lossless and lossy tracks, you have to do so with you sub turned down/off.

I suppose the same thing can be projected on to the quality of your amp/speakers. The difference between discrete class A and class A/B amplification might even make more of an audible difference than DD+ to lossless, and speakers make a pretty big difference too. If you're listening to a costcutters $79 5.1 speaker set, not even the best ears in the world could tell the difference, but on 5 individual $2500 (each) long throw studio monitors, you probably will. Just my 2 cents.

That doesnt make any sense. On my setup, this HD DVD is LOADED with LFE!

That's what I found so shocking - frankly, I expected a ton of LFE. I even played several sections several times moving my listening position around the room to see if I was just missing something from a wicked room null or something. Nothing helped. I started to get really disgusted when the helicopter decepticon is shooting everything in Soccent Base in the beginning - I recall that scene had a TON of really LOW LFE. I built a "sonosub" about 8 years ago and believe me it can kick out the LFE (goosed with a Mackie FR1400i putting out 1400 watts to it and tuned to 17 hz).

Maybe firmware would help? I'm not sure if I have the latest

Unbelievable. Absolutely fantastic. All the talk about how bad it was going to be had me believing it. I have an XA1 and a PS3. Yesterday I took advantage of Circuit's BOGO, then went to bust buy and they matched the half off. I ended up with Ultimate Matrix as well. In all, I cam home yesterday with 11 HD-DVD's and one BD. I was extremely happy with my purchases!

Anyways, I am loving Transformers. They audio is absolutely STUNNING!

Here is a screen shot on my 120" screen...

http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p78/fst96se/DSC03045.jpg

I hook my XA2 to Onkyo 805 through HDMI, with my XA2 sound setting to PCM.

There is plenty of LFE in this movie. However, I do have to make adjustment to the LFE channel on my 805 and turned up the volume a bit more. I normally listen to movie at -5db, however, with Transformer, I have to boost it all the way up to 0db. And it sound fantastic. I'm very happy with the sound, however, to say is better than Uncompressed PCM, I'm not too sure about that. I do have to admit those, the use of surround sound is best on both side of the format. I hope other movie would catch up with this sort of sound mix.

That doesnt make any sense. On my setup, this HD DVD is LOADED with LFE!

Ditto here. My ears were bleeding, my kid woke up and came downstairs crying, the neighborhood dogs were howling, car alarms were going off, and the cops came by twice (they stayed the second time to finish watching the movie with me and have a beer).

Ok, none of that happened, but the LFE rocked the house.

That's what I found so shocking - frankly, I expected a ton of LFE. I even played several sections several times moving my listening position around the room to see if I was just missing something from a wicked room null or something. Nothing helped. I started to get really disgusted when the helicopter decepticon is shooting everything in Soccent Base in the beginning - I recall that scene had a TON of really LOW LFE. I built a "sonosub" about 8 years ago and believe me it can kick out the LFE (goosed with a Mackie FR1400i putting out 1400 watts to it and tuned to 17 hz).

Maybe firmware would help? I'm not sure if I have the latest

Something is definitely wrong... I found TF to have great bass - some had to be dipping pretty low. Has anyone made a waterfall yet? I'll look around for one...

I'm EXTREMELY upset with the audio track on this release. I had stopped buying HD-DVD with the Matrix collection because I thought they were destined to fail, but I simply had to own this title in HD, no matter which format. I put it in and started watching and was shocked that there was absolutely NO LFE in this movie at all. I've watched plenty of TrueHD and DD+ movies on HD-DVD with my analog setup and they have given me no problems to date - PLENTY of bass, especially on movies like the Matrix. But this one was just shocking - my gain lights didn't show input signal hardly at all throughout the entire movie, even though I turned my sub channel up and had the volume at near THX reference level (SPL calibrated). I thought the problem might be the analog signal, so I switched to digital via coaxial to have the decoding done in my receiver and it made no difference. Interestingly, it really seemed that the whole soundtrack was very quiet - I had to turn the volume up significantly higher than all other titles I own just to hear conversations at a reasonable level - and this was not because of dynamic range, either.

Am I really the only one experiencing this? It's enough to make me think the SD-DVD would have been the better choice. Then again, it could have had the same problems.
Weird.

When my I plugged in my sub, my metal shelving at the back of the room started rattling. In fact, it was so bad, I'm thinking of removing some and replacing them with wood shelves. In the meantime I'll remove the metal items on those shelves (like my DVD copy of Terminator 2 with the metal case) to see if it makes a difference.

P.S. I'm using an SVS 25-31 PC (http://www.svsound.com/products-sub-cyl-pcpow3.cfm) sub. It "only" goes as low as maybe 20 Hz.

I found the LFE to be most plentiful. Smooth too, not boomy at all. I wish I could remember the scene, but it was felt more than it was heard. I ran my sub last night (18" Velo) cut off at 50 hz, and some parts were just rediculous with LFE. The kitchen will never be the same.

Interestingly, it really seemed that the whole soundtrack was very quiet - I had to turn the volume up significantly higher.
I mentioned earlier that it sounded like it was recorded at a lower than usual level, as well. However, that doesn't mean it didn't sound spectacular to me, just lower in volume.

this is a freaking movie,love it.what a f... :D.
thank you paramount to go exclusif.poor br:D.

sounds better than anything else i own. optical only... but still.

svs workout test... @ 1:56:10 there is a bass tone that will shake and wake the dead from their grave. when ironhide dodged the missiles and flipped over using his cannons. DAYUMMMNNN!!!

sound level was a bit lower for me as well, but fine when turned up. As for the guy wondering where the bass is, something strange is definitely going on in the setup/other components, because it's certainly not the disc. Just the little bit I previewed had some of the best LFE I've heard on a disc...powerful without being boomy or muddy.

sounds better than anything else i own. optical only... but still.

svs workout test... @ 1:56:10 there is a bass tone that will shake and wake the dead from their grave. when ironhide dodged the missiles and flipped over using his cannons. DAYUMMMNNN!!!

Ive played that part over and over and over. Its nuts and I love it :D

sounds better than anything else i own. optical only... but still.

svs workout test... @ 1:56:10 there is a bass tone that will shake and wake the dead from their grave. when ironhide dodged the missiles and flipped over using his cannons. DAYUMMMNNN!!!

That was an amazing scene! I think the bass in this one is so well done. I think a lot of dvd's used to overkill on the bass. This one sounded very natural, and not boomy. I live in a townhouse and thought the neighbors would be coming over and complaining. haha. Good thing I have a nice bonus room, behind my garage for my theater. Neither neighbors on either side use theirs much, so that works out for me!

I was very impressed with the DD+ track from Paramount.

My surrounds got a good workout throughout most of the movie.
Bass was very impressive but not overly boomy.

I put it right up there, neck and neck with a lossless track.

Something is definitely wrong... I found TF to have great bass - some had to be dipping pretty low. Has anyone made a waterfall yet? I'll look around for one...
That reminds me of this thread:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=820187

The TrueHD track on the moive Pulse has the lowest bass I think of any movie out there right now. It contains a 16-18Hz pulsing signal that last about 15 seconds. It is not for the faint of heart!

On my system, I meassured 113dB at my listening position (15 feet away from the subs) and 122dB at 1M at that 16-18Hz frequency. Btw, my HT room is 6500 cu. ft.

I have no doubt that there are brief moments on TF that comes close to those, if not surpass them.

When I watched TF last night, I was "only" playing at THX reference level. My 885 pre/pro (well, amps/speakers I suppose) will go well past reference.

Anyone in the area wanna come watch TF at, say reference + 10db? :D

^If only I was closer, I would for DAMN sure watch it at your place! :eek:

Just finished watching it. I thought the DD+ track was excellent. I don't think I'd be able to tell a difference between it and a lossless track.

Damn it, this is the second day in a row that I came home too late. I was only able to blast it until the pink bike chase.

The parts that amazed me the most was the blast of sand you hear from the surrounds during Scorponok, and the part on Air Force One when you hear the sound of a woman coming from a corner. I actually thought that some chick broke into my house.

It was a really good soundtrack and likely one of the best I've heard using DD+. I would love to hear what it would have sounded like using lossless. As good as it is, IMO it still isn't as good as some of the lossless tracks I've heard on HD-DVD and BD. Lossless just seems to have more depth to the sound.

I'm happy with what they did with Transformers but I'm betting we would have been in tears with lossless.

I'm happy with what they did with Transformers but I'm betting we would have been in tears with lossless.

I agree. I think it's just that the sound design team is made up of magicians.:)
I don't know if I would use this to test a HT, It'll probably make anything sound like gold.
This one's definently getting the oscar.

It would be hilarious if Paramount issued a press release saying the audio on Transformers is actually lossless but the authoring equipment has it showing as DD+ erronously. I'd love to see the look on some of these blowhards face. :)

I have had one recurring problem with the audio track, but since I haven't seen it mentioned, I fear it may be a problem with my center. Everytime Mikaela says 'I'm glad I got in the car with you' right in the middle of the final battle, it makes a popping/clipping sound (I think on 'Pop' and 'Car'). It's the only time I hear that in the entire disc, but it repeats itself everytime I go back to watch it. Hmm....

I am under the suspicion that all of the dialogue may have had their levels raised.

When I listen to that scene with Megan Fox her voice sounds 'compressed'. Kind of like her voice was recorded in a booth. I hear it with her voice and sometimes with Jon Voight's voice. But only those two, everything else is perfect.

I'm thinking that both of them probably read the lines too softly or quietly.

I think the cannon flip over the screaming woman about toasted my sub , the excursion there had to be pushing my 15" sub as far as it has ever been pushed ( very intense at reference levels but scared me and I probably will not push it that hard again ;) ) .

The more I listen to the audio on this disc the more impressed I become .

--- Jason

Same here! I just finished my 3rd time through and have more friends coming over on Friday...So many demo moments and they all impress.
That scene in particular is just amazing and reminds me of my favorite demo scene on DVD which was The Matrix...the helicopter scene where Trinity escapes and it crashes into the building except this is WAY better! :D

Am I the only one who is not hearing bass?
I remember, in the theater, at the beginning when the helicopter turns into the robot and lets out a shockwave, I remember hearing lots of bass.
Watching last night, I got almost nothing.
I even changed my audio from HDMI to analog outs and very little bass.
I'm not ruling out that I have something set up wrong but when I played the Iron Man trailer, I heard some bass.

I'm EXTREMELY upset with the audio track on this release. I had stopped buying HD-DVD with the Matrix collection because I thought they were destined to fail, but I simply had to own this title in HD, no matter which format. I put it in and started watching and was shocked that there was absolutely NO LFE in this movie at all. I've watched plenty of TrueHD and DD+ movies on HD-DVD with my analog setup and they have given me no problems to date - PLENTY of bass, especially on movies like the Matrix. But this one was just shocking - my gain lights didn't show input signal hardly at all throughout the entire movie, even though I turned my sub channel up and had the volume at near THX reference level (SPL calibrated). I thought the problem might be the analog signal, so I switched to digital via coaxial to have the decoding done in my receiver and it made no difference. Interestingly, it really seemed that the whole soundtrack was very quiet - I had to turn the volume up significantly higher than all other titles I own just to hear conversations at a reasonable level - and this was not because of dynamic range, either.

Am I really the only one experiencing this? It's enough to make me think the SD-DVD would have been the better choice. Then again, it could have had the same problems.

Edit: not that it's germane to this discussion, but I did feel the picture quality was beyond compare. It was just as good as any of the Matrix disc and any Blu-Ray disc I own. Absolutely phenomenal.

Same here (sorry if this is a double post).
Transformers was the first HDDVD I played since Terminator 3 where I was expecting the bass to blow me away and I got nothing.
I went as far as to unplug my sub, then back in and didn't hear a difference.
With the little one asleep, I couldn't do a proper test but tonight I'll hook up the Xbox 360 addon and see if the downmix to DTS gives me any more bass.
I'll also throw in Matrix, Kong, Batman Returns, and maybe some Blu-Ray for good measure to test other bass.

Other than that, I think the soundtrack is amazing, almost a flawless 360 degree experience. I never though I was hearing sound out of the back speakers, it was just coming from all over, if that makes sense.

Am I the only one who is not hearing bass?
I remember, in the theater, at the beginning when the helicopter turns into the robot and lets out a shockwave, I remember hearing lots of bass.
Watching last night, I got almost nothing.
I even changed my audio from HDMI to analog outs and very little bass.
I'm not ruling out that I have something set up wrong but when I played the Iron Man trailer, I heard some bass.

Wow, this is uncanny! See:

I'm EXTREMELY upset with the audio track on this release. I had stopped buying HD-DVD with the Matrix collection because I thought they were destined to fail, but I simply had to own this title in HD, no matter which format. I put it in and started watching and was shocked that there was absolutely NO LFE in this movie at all. I've watched plenty of TrueHD and DD+ movies on HD-DVD with my analog setup and they have given me no problems to date - PLENTY of bass, especially on movies like the Matrix. But this one was just shocking - my gain lights didn't show input signal hardly at all throughout the entire movie, even though I turned my sub channel up and had the volume at near THX reference level (SPL calibrated). I thought the problem might be the analog signal, so I switched to digital via coaxial to have the decoding done in my receiver and it made no difference. Interestingly, it really seemed that the whole soundtrack was very quiet - I had to turn the volume up significantly higher than all other titles I own just to hear conversations at a reasonable level - and this was not because of dynamic range, either.

Am I really the only one experiencing this? It's enough to make me think the SD-DVD would have been the better choice. Then again, it could have had the same problems.

Edit: not that it's germane to this discussion, but I did feel the picture quality was beyond compare. It was just as good as any of the Matrix disc and any Blu-Ray disc I own. Absolutely phenomenal.

and

That's what I found so shocking - frankly, I expected a ton of LFE. I even played several sections several times moving my listening position around the room to see if I was just missing something from a wicked room null or something. Nothing helped. I started to get really disgusted when the helicopter decepticon is shooting everything in Soccent Base in the beginning - I recall that scene had a TON of really LOW LFE. I built a "sonosub" about 8 years ago and believe me it can kick out the LFE (goosed with a Mackie FR1400i putting out 1400 watts to it and tuned to 17 hz).

Maybe firmware would help? I'm not sure if I have the latest

At least now I KNOW I'm not crazy! Your assessment sounds almost identical to mine.

Am I the only one who is not hearing bass?
I remember, in the theater, at the beginning when the helicopter turns into the robot and lets out a shockwave, I remember hearing lots of bass.
Watching last night, I got almost nothing.
I even changed my audio from HDMI to analog outs and very little bass.
I'm not ruling out that I have something set up wrong but when I played the Iron Man trailer, I heard some bass.
I also thought the bass was a little light. The 1:55 moment shook the entire room, but I thought more of the action scenes would have more impact. I ended up turning my sub up by 3 decibels and that seemed to work better. I put on the Ironman trailer with my sub level still up and the LFE was deafening.

I expected the bass to equal one of my favorite test scenes...
In Spider-Man 2, when Doctor O turns on the machine that looks like the sun.
That sends the neighbors diving for the phone.
It will be the first scene I play when I get the Blu-Ray later this week.

It was funny, I was all prepared for that helicopter/robot scene, had my hand on the remote volume, anticipating my wife to tell me to turn it down, not even a blip.

It sounded great on my system...

That first scene wasnt bassy to me in the DLP theater I saw it in either time. The rest of the movie, atleast on my setup, is full of bass. I love it!

I have to ask, am I the only one hearing bass? Hehe. Soundtrack was excellent. My whole room was shaking (knocked a poster off the wall during the ironhide scene, it was almost scary). Dialog was crisp and I never had to turn anything up. Actually had to turn down my sub a few dB.

It would be hilarious if Paramount issued a press release saying the audio on Transformers is actually lossless but the authoring equipment has it showing as DD+ erronously. I'd love to see the look on some of these blowhards face. :)

That's about as likely as Toshiba coming out and saying that HD-DVD is really a hoax and all red titles are really just crippled Blu-ray discs...

I'm sure that the DD+ on this title sounds amazing. I have heard many DD+ titles that do. But lossless wins every time, even if it's a very subtle improvement. I don't get the angry tone of those suggesting that this wouldn't be the case with this title because it sounds so good right now. Should we also start telling ourselves that we'd see no improvment with 4K images just because our current HD media/hardware is limited to 2K?

If/when Paramount releases this on Blu-ray, I'll buy it and enjoy it even if it doesn't have lossless audio. But I won't pretend that no possible improvement could have been gained with full lossless 24/48encoding. It's not about trying to make a format look good in a sham debate on some forum. It should be about sending the studios a message that lossless audio should be a standard goal for all authored discs on BOTH formats. Perhaps with more time/care in video compression, Paramount could have made the bandwidth available for lossless TrueHD on this title. They should be made aware that this should be their goal on the next release... regardless of HD format.


It was a really good soundtrack and likely one of the best I've heard using DD+. I would love to hear what it would have sounded like using lossless. As good as it is, IMO it still isn't as good as some of the lossless tracks I've heard on HD-DVD and BD. Lossless just seems to have more depth to the sound.

I'm happy with what they did with Transformers but I'm betting we would have been in tears with lossless.

The voice of reason.

This sound track beats many lossless tracks to a pulp, so having lossless or not is only a part of the story.

Frankly, if I thought I was missing anything, you might have a point. But clearly, there would have been very little improvement by having lossless on this disc, it's that good.

Now - if the DD+ presentation on this disc had sucked, I might be bitchin', but that's clearly not the case. It has been given a perfect 5/5 or 10/10 score by every credible review.

rdjam,

sure, if the soundtrack recording is BETTER to begin with than that of another film, it's possible that the lossy 1500 kbps DD track of this title would sound better than the lossless track of another movie with a poorer-quality soundtrack.

I hope it's obvious that this isn't being questioned.

Just like DVD of Toy story might "look better" than a HD copy of a soft-focus film like A Chistmas Story.

But taking the SAME lossy track, which sounds amazing as it is already presented, and encoding it losslessly, would reveal even more subtle detail and acoustic information and make it sound *even* better than the great sound you're getting now.

That's my point. And it's a point that's been verified on every title thus far that's shipped with both lossy and lossless encoding... that no matter how good/great the lossy sounds, the lossless is just a little bit better...

I've only seen about half the movie and my first impressions were it's no match for a good lossless audio track. Granted, the sound track was pretty good but the dynamics still sound compressed, not as open sounding as a good lossless audio track. The source material was very good, but I think it could have been a whole lot better with a lossless audio track.

I have issues with the PQ as well but that's another topic.

I'm going to want to recheck this on someone else's reference system.

That's about as likely as Toshiba coming out and saying that HD-DVD is really a hoax and all red titles are really just crippled Blu-ray discs...

Or BDA admitting knowingly selling equipment incapable of playing all BD content due to BD-J, BD+ and/or profile issues.

I personally thought the LFE was a little lighter than other HD titles, but I thought that was a good thing. To many times in other movies during action scenes with lots of explosions I found myself reaching for the remote to turn it down a notch. Not this one...I thought the volume stayed pretty steady throughout and sounded great. Dialog was very intelligible even during heavy action scenes. I turned my SW down a couple DB because my wife was watching a movie in the other room. I have a dedicated HT that is pretty well isolated from the rest of the house so I can crank it up pretty good. If I had left it at the pre-calibrated level it would have had more punch to it for sure. To me the LFE was very natural as was the rest of the DD+ track.

My observations,I have talked to a cpl of guys that are audio engineers for higher end electronics companies and was told that "calibrating" your audio system is fine for a benchmark as where to start from, but most movies and even musical recordings are recorded differently/ mixed differently and recorded at different db levels, hence the having to jack the volume on TF and many other films/concerts I own. The same goes for centre channel, surrounds and of course bass db levels, thats why some pre/pro's and receivers have gain adjustments on the remote for each of these functions (mine does:D). So, if you believe that once you have calibrated your system and can sit back and get the most out of every soundtrack you listen to with no further adjustments, you may just be missing out on how good that fav flick or concert really sounds. Of course for the average viewer/listener "good" is good enough...not for me or many others around here. Enjoy and have fun.

Over all, my assesment of the soundtrack was a BIG wow!! I also agree that the bass was a little light at times, but nice not to be boomy like so many films that just add tones to make the sub...rumble for no reason, very fake and doesn't add anything to the experience. However, next time I play this disc I will turn the old PW2200 up a notch and perhaps +1,2,3,4,5:eek: db on the sub gain on my Emo "big dog" pre/pro.

Yup, that should do it!!

For those complaining about not enough bass... How low do your subs REALLY go?

Some claim that some of the bass extension in Transformers goes below 20 Hz, which is very tough for many subs. If yours is one of them, then you won't get the thumps from that portion of the signal.

Even my big SVS sub only goes down to about 25 Hz reliably, and then gets significantly weaker very quickly below that.

My observations,I have talked to a cpl of guys that are audio engineers for higher end electronics companies and was told that "calibrating" your audio system is fine for a benchmark as where to start from, but most movies and even musical recordings are recorded differently/ mixed differently and recorded at different db levels, hence the having to jack the volume on TF and many other films/concerts I own. The same goes for centre channel, surrounds and of course bass db levels, thats why some pre/pro's and receivers have gain adjustments on the remote for each of these functions (mine does:D). So, if you believe that once you have calibrated your system and can sit back and get the most out of every soundtrack you listen to with no further adjustments, you may just be missing out on how good that fav flick or concert really sounds. Of course for the average viewer/listener "good" is good enough...not for me or many others around here. Enjoy and have fun.

Over all, my assesment of the soundtrack was a BIG wow!! I also agree that the bass was a little light at times, but nice not to be boomy like so many films that just add tones to make the sub...rumble for no reason, very fake and doesn't add anything to the experience. However, next time I play this disc I will turn the old PW2200 up a notch and perhaps +1,2,3,4,5:eek: db on the sub gain on my Emo "big dog" pre/pro.

Yup, that should do it!!

I will admit that there is a GREAT degree of variability between movie recording levels and such, but I think I deserve a bit more credit than that (not that you're accusing me of anythign here). The bottom line is that at any given level the vast majority of action blockbusters that I own on HD-DVD or Blu-Ray display a relatively similar range of LFE. This is not my experience with TF...and its not a subtle difference. Further, having seen the movie in the theater (modern, hi-fi Sony at that) multiple times, my assessment is also tempered with what I consider to be the way this movie is "supposed" to sound like. My sub gain is typically set at -10dB on my pre/pro for bistream audio, and similarly calibrated with channel gain via analog audio; yet even turning the sub channel up +6dB or so didn't give me the kind of LFE I was expecting. The problem seemed to be that the signal just wasn't there. I agree that muddy or "boomy" bass is to be avoided at all costs. My sub is quite capable, however, at faithfully reproducing accurate bass even into very low registers, so generally I can tell if this type of problem is the fault of the recorded track, or my system.

Despite this, I do think the DD+ track is simply stunning in clarity and channel definition. The surround effects and separation approach the quality I've only heard with TrueHD or PCM tracks. I was just really disappointed that the bass is not at all what I was expecting, and there doesn't seem to be an apparent reason for it.

For those complaining about not enough bass... How low do your subs REALLY go?

Some claim that some of the bass extension in Transformers goes below 20 Hz, which is very tough for many subs. If yours is one of them, then you won't get the thumps from that portion of the signal.

Even my big SVS sub only goes down to about 25 Hz reliably, and then gets significantly weaker very quickly below that.

My sub is a custom build - 15" driver in a 9.5 cubic ft cylindrical enclosure with 1.5" MDF endcaps. Ported and tuned to 17 hz and driven with 1400 watts at 4 ohms by a Mackie FR1400i amp w/built-in low pass crossover set to 65 hz. I've measured SPL levels over 120 dB at listening position using test tone signals at 20 hz. The design is actually very similar to your SVS sub because there was a "sonosub" DIY building fad developing over at HTF.com in the late nineties when I built mine. The guy that made the idea of the sonosub popular (and his partner) started making them full-time and formed the company SVS.

[QUOTE=Chris Campbell;11945713]I will admit that there is a GREAT degree of variability between movie recording levels and such, but I think I deserve a bit more credit than that (not that you're accusing me of anythign here).

Hi Chris, I wasn't accusing you or anyone else of anything, some folks seem to think that once setup...thats it. BTW, I do agree with your observations, my post was more of a workaround for fixing any "loss" from certain audio tracks.

I thought the overall soundtrack was very good too but i also experienced not being blown away by bass like alot of people said... I have a JL Fathom 113 that diff cranks out alot of bass on other movies and my basement which is sealed is only about 2000 to 2500 cbft... I'm going to try re EQing my Integra 9.8 because i just added a bunch of sound panels to my HT... I'm playing transformers on a XA2 out through HDMI... i was playing it -5MV...

Interesting how a few of us find the LFE lacking. I was waiting for a real explosion in that initial attack on the Qatar bass and was left thinking "errr I need a new sub". I was suspecting my setup or equipment initially but haven't had a chance to mess with my settings.

Interesting how a few of us find the LFE lacking. I was waiting for a real explosion in that initial attack on the Qatar bass and was left thinking "errr I need a new sub". I was suspecting my setup or equipment initially but haven't had a chance to mess with my settings.

Just looking over some of the posts I think the harder you cheer for red over blu the better this title sounds. For me this transfer was no better or worse than kong.

I normally have my subs tuned down a little because I find a lot of movies to be a bit bass heavy. Transformers seems to be a bit bass lite, this has nothing to do with lossy vs lossless, you just need to turn LFE up a bit compared to some movies.

Yea i have no bias and support both formats equally and could care less if one fails or they both stay on forever... I would just agree with some of the other posters where i expected big bass to occur it just didn't happen... O well still a great movie... and still an overall great audio to demo a home theater...

Just looking over some of the posts I think the harder you cheer for red over blu the better this title sounds. For me this transfer was no better or worse than kong.

It's got nothing to do with blu vs red for me. I only have D-DVD and while I think the soundtrack is excellent, the LFE is definitely lacking on my system. I'm going to play around with settings tonight and barring that I'll bring my disc over to a friends place to try on his setup.

As far as bass goes, my Genelec HTS6 sub ROCKS my house. Every footstep by a transformer rumbled the house. I have my sub adjustment level calibrated to -8dB on my processor = 80dB @ volume level of 50, while my main speakers are calibrated to 75dB @ volume 50. I listened to volume setting 40 during the whole movie (50 is too much = 1/2 of max volume) . If I turn the sub adjustment level up to +15dB it feels like someone is punching you in the chest which is too much for me. Heck you can feel the footsteps in another room. The low frequency sweep during the battle with Devastator vibrated everyone's clothing and hair follicles. Basically it sounded as if a real transformer was walking outside my window. Pretty cool.

One noticeable issue I have is on Jon Voight's dialogue in the center channel, at the end of the movie (after the battle scene) has some breakup in it. Maybe it was recorded that way. But I found it annoying.

I think i have somewhat located the problem to my XA2 (2.5) in my basement theater... even on The Pulse when i had the fathom in my living room on a different XA2 using analogs the sub was just crazy loud in a totally open floorplan... Now in a sealing basement it is just not the same... I tested playing monster's house on my PS3 and even at -10MV the sub is scary loud when the house comes alive and starts walking it feels like my house is gonna fall down...

Right now i have XA2 hooked up through hdmi in my basement and there is just something not right...

Frequencies below 40hz do much better is you have your sub placed in a corner of your room. If you are having LFE issues on this title and don't have your sub located close to a wall to bounce off of, you might try moving your LFE source. Just a thought. Seems many are lacking lows on this title and nobody is able to track down why. Personally, this title has some of the deepest bass I've heard.

its just wierd since i have other blu ray titles that sound amazing like monsters house at the end where the volume is only -10MV and rocks the house... so that would rule out my sub or the system... i'm wandering if its a disk error or hd dvd player error... i might try comparing some sd dvd between the ps3 and XA2 and see if there is a problem there... i'm also gonna borrow a buddys Transformer...

my sub is not located in the corner it is between the center and right speaker and maybe 8-12 inchs from the wall... but in a 2500 cbft sealed basement where other things are crazy loud i just don't understand what is going on...

My sub is dead smack in the middle of the room aligned under the center channel. Corner loading will make a sub "louder", not necessarily sound better.

yea i have a JL fathom 113 so i didn't see the need in corner loading it...

Im sorry guys im with Chris Campbell in this thread - something was very wrong with the DD+ track and LFE.

I popped in riddick and it sounded correct - same setting, etc

6 def tech bp 30s, center, svs 12/2+ its not as good as some systems on here, but it will make you jump and check the china downstairs afterwards...

You did not offer the poll choice I was looking for (was a strong DD+ transfer, but did not exceed or equal SOME of the other tracks that I have heard on TrueHD for HD DVD).

For me, the bass was lacking and the center channel could have been stronger.