Laserdisc Sound vs Blu Ray sound - Differences ? - AVS Forum
1 2  3  ... Last
HDTV Software Media Discussion > Laserdisc Sound vs Blu Ray sound - Differences ?
FoxyMulder's Avatar FoxyMulder 03:28 PM 06-28-2008
I have been reading how Laserdisc releases are much better sound quality than the equivalent DVD releases. ( or so some say ) People say DVD has more compression while the Laserdisc opens up the soundstage and sounds so much better.

Question i have is are Blu Ray discs with their lossless soundtracks now a step above what Laserdisc offered.....Would you say that even the 640kb/s or 1.5mbp/s lossy tracks are better than Laserdiscs sound ?

I know that you have to compare on a movie basis and you can't just say one sounds better than the other but i was wondering if the owners of Laserdiscs are now happy with the sound they get from Blu Ray ?

Of course it's also all in the mix and Laserdisc used to offer PCM 2 chanel soundtracks which you could decode into Pro Logic....Should Blu Ray offer the original 2 channel soundtrack in PCM form for older films as well as a remix ( i think so )

Kram Sacul's Avatar Kram Sacul 04:28 PM 06-28-2008
DVD AC3 vs LD PCM or LD AC3?

There were a lot of complaints about the dvd 5.1 mixes being weaker than their laserdisc counterparts, supposedly because of mixdown purposes. I guess that's not done anymore.
Vader424242's Avatar Vader424242 05:37 PM 06-28-2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kram Sacul View Post

DVD AC3 vs LD PCM or LD AC3?

There were a lot of complaints about the dvd 5.1 mixes being weaker than their laserdisc counterparts, supposedly because of mixdown purposes. I guess that's not done anymore.

A textbook example is the AC-3 track of the "Space Jam" LaserDisc compared to the SE DVD. The DVD track is not even in the same league as the LD (I am comparing the 5.1 mixes), so much so that the anamorphic picture is not enough incentive for me to play the DVD vs the non-anamorphic picture of the LD.
Phantom Stranger's Avatar Phantom Stranger 06:35 PM 06-28-2008
It was a well known phenomena that laserdisc soundtracks often beat their dvd counterpart. There are various reasons for this of course. The Blu-ray audio tracks are in a different league all together, as most of them are the original master soundtrack in lossless form. I think it would have to take a disastrous remix job for the Blu-ray to lose to the laserdisc soundtrack.
Steve Burke's Avatar Steve Burke 07:52 PM 06-28-2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phantom Stranger View Post

It was a well known phenomena that laserdisc soundtracks often beat their dvd counterpart. There are various reasons for this of course. The Blu-ray audio tracks are in a different league all together, as most of them are the original master soundtrack in lossless form. I think it would have to take a disastrous remix job for the Blu-ray to lose to the laserdisc soundtrack.

Just working off memory, I believe that laserdiscs had 44.1KHz digital PCM tracks (whereas many Blu-Rays today have 48KHz). OTOH, if you compare it to Warner's many Blu-Ray 640K DD only lossy tracks, then on a pure fidelity basis laserdisc is better.

It is so pathetic that after 20 years, we still cannot make a definitive statement that today's best consumer format has better audio.
FoxyMulder's Avatar FoxyMulder 10:33 PM 06-28-2008
I guess a question would be - If you take the DTS-HD Master Audio or Dolby Tru HD track and listen to it's core at 1.5mbp/s or 640kbp/s is this core as good as the old Laserdisc mixes as in has the compression that people didn't like about DVD ended with Blu Ray even on the core soundtracks ? I ask that because the core of these tracks is taken from the lossless version so surely should be a massive improvement. I admit my knowledge is limited on the sound aspect of Blu Ray and how it really works.

I ask that because at the moment my sound is restricted to core listening as i don't have HDMI in my current amp and the Playstation 3 doesn't offer analog out. I believe many will be listening to the core rather than the full uncompressed lossless track until they upgrade their amps.

At the moment studio's are giving us a remix but another question is should they give us the original unaltered 2 channel track as PCM stereo so we can listen to it as Dolby Pro Logic or Pro Logic II - Remixes don't always offer the best sound i have found although that's on a per movie basis.

What do others here think ?
stephan.klose's Avatar stephan.klose 04:20 AM 06-29-2008
I had a laserdisc player with pretty good equipment.
For example "Speed" or "Independence Day" on dvd never even got close to their Laserdisc counterparts. Now with Blu Ray and DTS HD sound that has changed.
Chad R's Avatar Chad R 07:11 AM 06-29-2008
I never thought that DD 5.1 on Laserdisc was superior to the same soundtrack on the DVD. They were mostly comparable. The difference in the debates I remember were the DTS laserdiscs vs. their DVD DTS counterparts, and of course the PCM 2 channel vs. the DD on DVD.

There was especially some hullabaloo over the Jurassic Park DTS DVD having weaker bass than it's LD equivalent. They even repressed the DVDs to add on the same soundtrack of the DVD, which some people claimed was cooked at the time to help sell DTS equipment. I personally never heard that much difference, and felt both soundtracks sounded incredible.

Now, PCM always has had better fidelity than anything DD put out. That was always the attraction to LD -- the standard stereo sountracks were much warmer than the 5.1 mixes on DVD. However, that warmth is apparent on the PCM 5.1 tracks on Blu-Ray, and in my opinion of the TruHD and DTS HD Masters. So, after some rambling, yes, I think Blu-Ray is superior to LD in the sound department.
bjmarchini's Avatar bjmarchini 09:16 AM 06-29-2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by FoxyMulder View Post

I guess a question would be - If you take the DTS-HD Master Audio or Dolby Tru HD track and listen to it's core at 1.5mbp/s or 640kbp/s is this core as good as the old Laserdisc mixes as in has the compression that people didn't like about DVD ended with Blu Ray even on the core soundtracks ? I ask that because the core of these tracks is taken from the lossless version so surely should be a massive improvement. I admit my knowledge is limited on the sound aspect of Blu Ray and how it really works.

I ask that because at the moment my sound is restricted to core listening as i don't have HDMI in my current amp and the Playstation 3 doesn't offer analog out. I believe many will be listening to the core rather than the full uncompressed lossless track until they upgrade their amps.

At the moment studio's are giving us a remix but another question is should they give us the original unaltered 2 channel track as PCM stereo so we can listen to it as Dolby Pro Logic or Pro Logic II - Remixes don't always offer the best sound i have found although that's on a per movie basis.

What do others here think ?

i think the answer is difficult and simple. If we are dealing with a lossless track (TrueHD, DTS-MA, then the answer is obvious as lossless would win.)

On the other hand...... From what I understand, LDs were not as "compressed" as DVD so it should offer better sound. Most bluray tracks even though they may seem the same as the SD are sometimes improved and offer a higher bitrate. On the other hand, some tracks are just carry overs from the HD. If this is the case, this may be a case where the LD sounds better if it was a bad encode.

By and large though, BD will usually sound better.
sound dropouts's Avatar sound dropouts 09:28 AM 06-29-2008
Quote:


From what I understand, LDs were not as "compressed" as DVD so it should offer better sound.

If I recall correctly, ld used ac3 at 384 kbs, while dvd mostly uses 440 kbs. the only way ld were not as compressed is if they were 2 channel pcm...which in theory dvds could do as well, but most of the time, studios are too lazy...the release of the original original star wars, a direct laserdisc port, had 2 channel dd instead of pcm.
Steve Burke's Avatar Steve Burke 12:07 PM 06-29-2008
I don't believe anyone claimed that AC3 on laserdiscs sounded better than AC3 on DVDs (unless it was due to the use of different masters). However, it is evident that the fidelity of the laserdisc PCM tracks were an order of magnitude better than DVD DD. The sad part is that this quality difference would still exist if they put the exact same laserdisc PCM track on DVD.

One of the problems with DVD players is that due to the intrinsic nature of the player mechanisms, its jitter performance is about 1,000 worse than the worst CD player. It is this poor timing of the digital datastream that put the DVD audio resolution ceiling at 12 bits.

So irregardless of the quality of the DVD player DAC circuitry, or even if one used high-quality outboard DAC circuitry, it is the timing accuracy which clocks the music. Jitter in CD transports is measured in part of a picosecond, whereas in DVD transports it is measured in tens of thousands of picoseconds. So while in theory DVD players are capable of 16-20 bits of sonic resolution, in practice it is only capable of 12 bits. Some players (such as those by Faroudja) addressed this shortcoming, but these were few and far in between.

For me, a simple conclusion is that the best laserdisc audio was better than the best DVD audio, and that the typical laserdisc audio was also better than the typical DVD audio.

When it comes to Blu-Ray, we still have 640K DD-only discs. So the general statement that "BD has better audio fidelity than 20-year old laserdiscs" cannot be made. Also, does anyone know what the jitter performance on BD players are?
bjmarchini's Avatar bjmarchini 12:53 PM 06-29-2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Burke View Post

I don't believe anyone claimed that AC3 on laserdiscs sounded better than AC3 on DVDs (unless it was due to the use of different masters). However, it is evident that the fidelity of the laserdisc PCM tracks were an order of magnitude better than DVD DD. The sad part is that this quality difference would still exist if they put the exact same laserdisc PCM track on DVD.

One of the problems with DVD players is that due to the intrinsic nature of the player mechanisms, its jitter performance is about 1,000 worse than the worst CD player. It is this poor timing of the digital datastream that put the DVD audio resolution ceiling at 12 bits.

So irregardless of the quality of the DVD player DAC circuitry, or even if one used high-quality outboard DAC circuitry, it is the timing accuracy which clocks the music. Jitter in CD transports is measured in part of a picosecond, whereas in DVD transports it is measured in tens of thousands of picoseconds. So while in theory DVD players are capable of 16-20 bits of sonic resolution, in practice it is only capable of 12 bits. Some players (such as those by Faroudja) addressed this shortcoming, but these were few and far in between.

For me, a simple conclusion is that the best laserdisc audio was better than the best DVD audio, and that the typical laserdisc audio was also better than the typical DVD audio.

When it comes to Blu-Ray, we still have 640K DD-only discs. So the general statement that "BD has better audio fidelity than 20-year old laserdiscs" cannot be made. Also, does anyone know what the jitter performance on BD players are?

But what if BD has an advanced codec such as DD+, DTS=HD, DTS-MA or TrueHD?
Steve Burke's Avatar Steve Burke 01:14 PM 06-29-2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by bjmarchini View Post

But what if BD has an advanced codec such as DD+, DTS=HD, DTS-MA or TrueHD?

IMO the lossy codecs (DD+, DTS-HD, DTS core) do not belong in the same category as the lossless (PCM, DTS-HD/MA, TrueHd).

So the question is probably "are the BD lossless tracks sonically superior to the laserdisc PCM tracks"?

For that, we probably need to answer the question "what is the jitter performance of BD player mechanisms vs laserdiscs ones". While in theory the BD lossless audio that is physically on the disc has better specs, it is a different issue whether those better specs are taken advantage of in practical terms.
Ken H's Avatar Ken H 01:50 PM 06-29-2008
Unnecessary comments deleted.
Richard Paul's Avatar Richard Paul 03:36 PM 06-29-2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Burke View Post

Just working off memory, I believe that laserdiscs had 44.1KHz digital PCM tracks (whereas many Blu-Rays today have 48KHz). OTOH, if you compare it to Warner's many Blu-Ray 640K DD only lossy tracks, then on a pure fidelity basis laserdisc is better.

As others have noted Laserdisc was only capable of 2 channel PCM audio so that is debatable since you are sometimes comparing 2 channel PCM audio with multi-channel lossy audio. Also I would mention that 2 channel PCM audio was added to Laserdisc after it was released and originally Laserdisc didn't support it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Burke View Post

It is so pathetic that after 20 years, we still cannot make a definitive statement that today's best consumer format has better audio.

You can make the statement that Blu-ray can support better audio quality and that in the vast majority of cases is superior to what either DVD or Laserdisc offered. Also even with a better video format some definitive statements can't be made and for instance you can't make the definitive statement that "DVD has better video quality than VHS" since that isn't always true.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Burke View Post

One of the problems with DVD players is that due to the intrinsic nature of the player mechanisms, its jitter performance is about 1,000 worse than the worst CD player. It is this poor timing of the digital datastream that put the DVD audio resolution ceiling at 12 bits.

According to Jim Taylor that was a myth made by Widescreen Review.
FoxyMulder's Avatar FoxyMulder 03:41 PM 06-29-2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Paul View Post

As others have noted Laserdisc was only capable of 2 channel PCM audio so that is debatable since you are sometimes comparing 2 channel audio with multi-channel audio. Also I would mention that 2 channel PCM audio was added to Laserdisc after it was released and originally Laserdisc didn't support it.


You can make the statement that Blu-ray can support better audio quality and that in the vast majority of cases is superior to what either DVD or Laserdisc offered. Also even with a better video format some definitive statements can't be made and for instance you can't make the definitive statement that "DVD has better video quality than VHS" since that isn't always true.


That was a myth made by Widescreen Review.

Yes...tests done in an UK mag showed jitter was not a problem in even modestly priced DVD players.

I believe Laserdisc got an upgrade though that allowed Digital 5.1 sound in both DTS and Dolby formats and DTS tracks were about 1200kbp/s ( not sure on exact figure )

It's the 2 channel PCM part which interests me with regards older films...I remember reading how Forrest Gumps 2 channel PMC track on Laserdisc sounded more immersive with more going on in the surrounds albeit in mono than the 5.1 track which according to the review at the time said the 5.1 track lacked surround information.

My point for bringing it up would be that i hope we can get older films from the eighties and early nineties the original 2 channel track as PCM ( as well as a remix ) on Blu Ray software.
Phantom Stranger's Avatar Phantom Stranger 04:53 PM 06-29-2008
What is this about 640 kbps soundtracks? Every studio outside of Warner is releasing lossless master soundtracks on their Blu-rays. Fox and Sony have never released anything but lossless audio on Blu-ray. Lionsgate stopped offering lossy only soundtracks after their initial wave of BDs. Even Starz has used PCM on all their releases. Apparently Universal will be releasing DTS-HD MA on every Blu-ray release and Paramount will be going forward with Dolby TrueHD on all new BDs. Blame Warner for continuing to issue substandard audio tracks.
FoxyMulder's Avatar FoxyMulder 05:12 PM 06-29-2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phantom Stranger View Post

What is this about 640 kbps soundtracks? Every studio outside of Warner is releasing lossless master soundtracks on their Blu-rays. Fox and Sony have never released anything but lossless audio on Blu-ray. Lionsgate stopped offering lossy only soundtracks after their initial wave of BDs. Even Starz has used PCM on all their releases. Apparently Universal will be releasing DTS-HD MA on every Blu-ray release and Paramount will be going forward with Dolby TrueHD on all new BDs. Blame Warner for continuing to issue substandard audio tracks.

The core track from Dolby True HD is usually 640kbp/s ( sometimes 448kbp/s ) its the minimum a person can get if they don't have an HDMI receiver or analog outputs on their player.

For DTS HD MA the minimum is usually 1.5mbp/s.
amirm's Avatar amirm 06:23 PM 06-29-2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Paul View Post

According to Jim Taylor that was a myth made by Widescreen Review.

Jim knows a ton about DVD. But he doesn't have any expertise in high-performance audio. His description of jitter degradation is pretty wrong in that quote. The effect of jitter is precisely that: it reduces the effective resolution. *Measured* perforamance of many DVD players is no better than 12-14 bits. Even DVD-A players struggled to get above 16 bits when they came out.

The fact that there are many more clocks/circuits in a DVD player as compared to a CD player heavily impacts how feasible it is to get good performance from them.
amirm's Avatar amirm 06:26 PM 06-29-2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by FoxyMulder View Post

Yes...tests done in an UK mag showed jitter was not a problem in even modestly priced DVD players.

That is pretty much at odds with tests in US magazines. I used to read the reviews religiously and many players fall way short of their specs. This was in high-end audio magazines that know what they are talking about.

Who had done the tests in UK and what was the nature of it?
JBLsound4645's Avatar JBLsound4645 06:51 PM 06-29-2008
I’m not practically keen on Bluray, so I’ve done a few compassions of (1996) academy award winner for best sound effects editing “The Ghost in the Darkness”.

ABC&D testing of the region 2 DVD and PAL laserdisc

First I switched the DRC dynamic range compressor to ON mode, on the Kenwood KRF-X9050D THX select and set the level where Kilmer’s character John Patterson says, “I’m going to sort it out” while firing of single round then reloading the rife then firing off a second shot in vengeful anger.

I set the SPL db level metre up and selected A weighting I wasn’t interested in C weighting, I set the level on the Kenwood for appropriate level to read a simple 70dbA in (dynamic range compression) mode.

Region 2 DVD
Six-track Dolby stereo digital
Dolby AC-3
Fader -8db
Rifle shots came in at 70dbA

The next setting was with DRC turned OFF and the fader level adjusted down by

Fader -12db
Rifle shots came in at 70dbA +- a few 0.0db nothing you’d really notice.

Dolby stereo 4:2:4
Analogue
Fader -5db
Rifle shots came in at 70dbA




Laserdisc PAL
PCM
Dolby stereo 4:2:4
Fader -11db



Steve Burke's Avatar Steve Burke 10:00 PM 06-29-2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Paul View Post

As others have noted Laserdisc was only capable of 2 channel PCM audio so that is debatable since you are sometimes comparing 2 channel PCM audio with multi-channel lossy audio. [/url].

Yes, that was why in my posts I explicitly said we are comparing fidelity, and I kept the number of channels out of it. With laserdiscs (PCM) we got matrixed surround audio with good fidelity. With DVD we got discrete surround audio with compromised fidelity. I will take the former any day.

IMO good surround effects is not a good measure of audio quality. Even 384K DD from satellite provides good surround effects. It is fidelity that is the issue.
Steve Burke's Avatar Steve Burke 10:13 PM 06-29-2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Paul View Post

You can make the statement that Blu-ray can support better audio quality and that in the vast majority of cases is superior to what either DVD or Laserdisc offered. Also even with a better video format some definitive statements can't be made and for instance you can't make the definitive statement that "DVD has better video quality than VHS" since that isn't always true.

I can make the claim that 99% of the time BD has better audio fidelity than DVD. For me that is close enough to 100%.

Unfortunately I cannot make that claim for laserdisc audio fidelity vs BD, because the number is probably closer to 80% (BD 640K or worse DD only discs). No matter how you justify it, 80% doesn't round to 100%. And I would still like to find out the jitter performance of BD players compared to laserdisc players.
FoxyMulder's Avatar FoxyMulder 04:05 AM 06-30-2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

That is pretty much at odds with tests in US magazines. I used to read the reviews religiously and many players fall way short of their specs. This was in high-end audio magazines that know what they are talking about.

Who had done the tests in UK and what was the nature of it?

What Video Magazine i believe used to do some extensive testing "on the bench" and i think you may be able to view their tests online although i stopped getting the mag many years ago but it was a respected magazine back then....That same mag tested amplifiers and checked the real RMS output which often conflicted with the rated one supplied by the manufacturers.

When i talk about low budget DVD players i mean one's costing $200 or more...Not talking the real cheap ones.

Here's a link to the magazines site...they changed their name since i used to buy it.

http://www.homecinemachoice.com/whatvideo/

Here's one example of their tests.

GUIDE PRICE £180
WHAT'S GOOD
Picture; sound; looks; connectivity
WHAT'S BAD
Lack of picture/sound tweaks
FEATURES
DVD/CD/VCD/MP3/CD-R/CD-RW/DVD+RW playback; Dolby Digital, DTS and virtual surround; frame by frame; slow-motion playback; resume playback; title playback; chapter playback; track playback; A-B repeat; memory playback; random playback; zoom; multiple search speed; multiple angle; 4:3 and 16:9 modes; E.P.M modes x 5; E.A.M modes x 3; subtitle; function customise
SOCKETS
One (RGB-capable) Scart; component video out; S-video out; composite video out; coaxial out; optical out; phono stereo audio out
DIMENSIONS
430(w) x 69(h) x 222(d)mm

Video jitter: 5ns (good)
Signal-to-noise ratio: -65.3dB (average)
Chroma AM/PM: -70.9dB/-63.9dB (excellent/good)
Chroma crosstalk: -54.4dB (average)
Frequency response (S-video) at 5.8MHz: -6.55dB (very good)
composite video at 5.8MHz: -6.77dB (very good)
Digital audio deviation: 373.5ps (average)
Another awesome entry-level player from Toshiba
PICTURE 9/10
SOUND 8/10
FEATURES 8/10
EASE OF USE 9/10
OVERALL 9/10


Regarding Jitter...I am sure i read that HDMI outputs can suffer from jitter extensively.....Perhaps Amirm you can shed more light on this ?

With regards Laserdisc sound and DVD...This site gives some interesting conclusions especially for those who thought The Phantom Menace on Laserdisc sounded better....This site concludes it's the same mix only the DVD was recorded at a lower volume...It's well known that volume changes can fool people into thinking something sounds better and god knows sometimes it's fooled me too.

http://www.videophile.info/Graphs/Page_01.htm - The site gives technical information and comparisons...Very useful.
JBLsound4645's Avatar JBLsound4645 06:46 AM 06-30-2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by FoxyMulder View Post

With regards Laserdisc sound and DVD...This site gives some interesting conclusions especially for those who thought The Phantom Menace on Laserdisc sounded better....This site concludes it's the same mix only the DVD was recorded at a lower volume...It's well known that volume changes can fool people into thinking something sounds better and god knows sometimes it's fooled me too.

Actually it’s the (1999) theatrical realise of the film that isn’t on DVD. And it cost me, £115.00 £130.00 pounds if I can think back that far.



Volume level on “Underworld” (2003) is a bit abrupt and I can apply dynamic EQ to LCR fronts if wanted to reduce the level while keeping the action flowing as its fairly bass sub bass and LFE.1 heavy.
lgans316's Avatar lgans316 08:55 AM 06-30-2008
The LD sound mix on Armageddon was 10 times better than the sound mix on any of the DVD versions including the Criterion edition.
JBLsound4645's Avatar JBLsound4645 09:07 AM 06-30-2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by lgans316 View Post

The LD sound mix on Armageddon was 10 times better than the sound mix on any of the DVD versions including the Criterion edition.

Are you 100% percent positive because I'd like to put that version under the close scrutiny if, I had Dolby AC-3 laserdisc player, because of both region 2 versions the first and second edition that I believe was sourced from the Criterion laserdisc edition, the split-surrounds only the surrounds on the digital AC-3 have technical issues!

There is popping and cracking that sounds like it was botched in the lab I don't give hoot where or which person was responsible for overseeing this, but clearly the sound guys weren't there otherwise I wouldn't be bringing the issue up.

This where the shuttles undock from the Russian space station while its burning up from the inside and bits and pieces start to breakaway and tumble towards, Freedom, you can clearly hear it on the surrounds it sticks out like sore thumb.
Shane Martin's Avatar Shane Martin 10:11 AM 06-30-2008
Quote:


The LD sound mix on Armageddon was 10 times better than the sound mix on any of the DVD versions including the Criterion edition

Are you talking about the DTS LD of Armageddon?
bjmarchini's Avatar bjmarchini 10:53 AM 06-30-2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Burke View Post

I can make the claim that 99% of the time BD has better audio fidelity than DVD. For me that is close enough to 100%.

Unfortunately I cannot make that claim for laserdisc audio fidelity vs BD, because the number is probably closer to 80% (BD 640K or worse DD only discs). No matter how you justify it, 80% doesn't round to 100%. And I would still like to find out the jitter performance of BD players compared to laserdisc players.

Its easy to throw statistics around but what matter is what you actually watch. Most releases I will never watch let alone own.

Here are releases for april. I see 6 that I may own (in green) and 8 that I may just rent (red). Out of those on my list there are 8 with lossless audio (4 each red and green. So that would make 57% of my ownership for april. That really isn't bad. And while a few select titles may have a badly put together 640K DD track, they are not that much worse than an LD that may be better.

Seeing that this is a BD versus LD and not LD versus DVD, I would give the hat to BD. I can live with a slightly less rich sound on a DD/DTS track in order to get Lossless on the half of the ones that I will watch or own.

As I said earlier about the stats. Stats don't really tell the whole story because each movie is unique and will not benefit from better sound as much as another.

April 29, 2008
27 Dresses (Fox)
First Knight (Sony)
The Golden Compass (New Line)
Motley Crue: Carnival of Sins (Warner Music Group)
Mozart: Die Zauberflote (Opus Arte)
Ocean's Eleven (Warner)
Ocean's Twelve (Warner)

April 22, 2008
National Geographic: Six Degrees Could Change the World (National Geographic)
One Missed Call (Warner)
The Orphanage (New Line)
Six Degrees Could Change the World (Warner Brothers)
Sublime (Warner)
April 15, 2008
Alien vs. Predator/Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem (Two-Pack) (Fox)
Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem (Fox)

Before the Devil Knows You're Dead (Image)
Commando (Fox)
Juno (Fox)

Mariah Carey: The Adventures of Mimi (Image)
A Passage to India (Sony)
Predator (Fox)
April 08, 2008
The 6th Day (Sony)
The Adventures of Baron Munchausen (Sony)
Sharkwater (Warner)
Space Ace (Digital Leisure)
Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story (Sony)
The Water Horse: Legend of the Deep (Sony)
Yukikaze (Bandai Visual)
April 01, 2008
10.5 Apocalypse: The Complete Miniseries (Echo Bridge)
Alvin and the Chipmunks (2007) (Fox)
Artie Lange's Beer League (Echo Bridge)
Behind The Yellow Line (Celestial)
Blackbeard (2006) (Echo Bridge)
Category 7: The End of the World (Echo Bridge)
Coyote Ugly (Walt Disney)
The Curse Of King Tut's Tomb: The Complete Miniseries (Echo Bridge)
Hidalgo (Walt Disney)
Justin Timberlake: Live at Madison Square Garden (Sony BMG)
The Last Sentinel (Echo Bridge)
Unbreakable (Walt Disney)


Now I know this is just one month of releases, but I have found in my HDM collection which around 80 so far that about half do have lossless. The other thing that we need to consider is the technology playing these discs. Isn't todays hardware better than hardware from 5-10 years ago? Just as analog film can offer more video detail in the film itself but often fails compared to HDM in real world use, the digital mediun can only give you so much whether it is digital or not (it still has to be processed into analog sound for your ears). hdmi offers more bandwisth than optical and coaxial and is required for DTS-HD and DD+ which many do include instead of lossless, but are downconverted for sending through the legacy digital connections.

.... and I don't know about you, but I don't like flipping disks.

So DD+/DTS-HD, DTS-MA and TrueHD are not going to be able to put out via optical or coaxial. You can use HDMI, but unless you have a receiver that decode the latter two codecs, you will not get their full sound range. The only option really is to use the analog outs to the receiver if you don't have a relatively new receiver so it is really dependant on the player.

If you are playing BD via anything but HDMI to a onkyo 605 or something or using the analog outs with a player that can decode them( and even many players can't decode them) you are not getting BDs full sound.

My first HDM player was an HD-A3. I thought it sounded fine even though it downconverted to DD. I upgraded my HTPC to BD/HD DVD playback. The lossless tracks really blow away now as I am using a program that can decode them and send them out via analog to my receiver.
JOHNnDENVER's Avatar JOHNnDENVER 11:12 AM 06-30-2008
Well my LD player(s) don't require flipping discs...


I will say that some of the best sounding tracks on LD were / are the 2 channel PCM from like music concerts.. Man, they really hold up well to todays stuff. This audio was / is typically, effectively lossless you know.
1 2  3  ... Last

Up
Mobile  Desktop