NetFlix BD's Without DTS-HD Master Audio / DD 5.1 Instead - Page 5

Originally Posted by Closet Geek 

Wow! This is an unbelievable post. Stranger than fiction even. You're actually arguing that it's acceptable to defraud the public as long as they can't tell the difference. I purposefully use the word "defraud" not so much because I believe this is what NF and RB are doing (entirely). But because this is eventually what WILL happen with this thinking. Charge them premium prices for regular gas because they can't tell the difference. Charge them prime prices on select beef because they can't tell the difference. Education? Medications? Where would it stop?

You speak in terms of pennies, which, yes essentially we are talking pennies in practical terms but in actual terms we are talking percentages. There is a 25% difference in the cost to rent DVD vs. BD. Why? Because BD is considered a premium medium. A medium which all along since inception hailed both HD picture AND sound. HD picture and sound is expected because that's what we were told and what was sold to us. It's synonymous with BD and even HD DVD. But what if you were told you were buying a four bedroom house but after you paid for it you only had a three bedroom house? And what if for the same credit score as your neighbor and same house you got a 25% higher interest rate on that home from the same bank? But hey, you don't know what your neighbor has so it's okay, right? How about this, you buy a corvette but when you get home you find out you got a V6. Although the idea of a V6 in a Vette is laughable, as no one has ever heard of such a thing, it's okay because it still goes 70mph on the highway, right?

Originally Posted by ack_bk 

How is Redbox defrauding anyone? Did they promise you that you would get lossless audio on all titles guaranteed? Please stop the dramatics. My point seemed to go right over your head. My point being that even audiophiles with high end systems have a hard time distinguishing betweeen lossy and lossless. My point is that I don't see this being the big issue for the majority of renters from Netflix or Redbox. Now if Lionsgate advertised DTS-HS-MA on the case of a purchased copy, and it only contained the lossy track, then yes, I would be pissed and either demand they fix the issue, offer me a refund, or give me a steep discount. But that is not what we are talking about here.
You do realize that many HD DVD titles came with lossy tracks, correct? For a time that was standard practice because, as I noted above, Dolby Digital Plus was considered by many to be indistinguishable from the lossless track. Feel free to go back and read through the forum circa 2007, this was a hot topic at AVS. Not all Blu-Ray releases have lossless tracks either. It is not mandatory to the spec that a studio must release their titles with lossless vs lossy. I don't understand why some of you are so upset. If you don't like it, just rent the DVD and save the 30 cents, or wait for it to stream on Netflix or Amazon.
I suggest you do your homework before you jump to conclusions. My perspective. I prefer a lossless track. Even if I cannot hear the difference vs a lossy, there is no harm in the studios providing the lossless track if there is more than enough capacity on the disc. But a Blu-Ray release not having a lossless track would certainly not stop me from buying or renting it. In fact I own several movies that are lossy only and guess what? I enjoyed the movie....

Originally Posted by Mark Booth 

My opinion: For a one-time rental viewing, Dolby 5.1 is just fine. Any movie that has an awesome enough soundtrack that I really feel the need for lossless audio is most likely a movie I'll buy anyway.
Of course, if I was ripping the rental copies to build a library of illegal movies then I might be upset about not getting lossless audio. But I don't do that sort of thing and I'm sure none of you are either.
Also, keep in mind that an occasional movie-only RETAIL disc is equipped with only lossy DD 5.1. One such example is the movie 'Red'. Only the deluxe 'Special Edition' version has lossless audio.
Mark

Originally Posted by ack_bk 

How is Redbox defrauding anyone? Did they promise you that you would get lossless audio on all titles guaranteed? Please stop the dramatics. My point seemed to go right over your head. My point being that even audiophiles with high end systems have a hard time distinguishing betweeen lossy and lossless. My point is that I don't see this being the big issue for the majority of renters from Netflix or Redbox. Now if Lionsgate advertised DTS-HS-MA on the case of a purchased copy, and it only contained the lossy track, then yes, I would be pissed and either demand they fix the issue, offer me a refund, or give me a steep discount. But that is not what we are talking about here.
You do realize that many HD DVD titles came with lossy tracks, correct? For a time that was standard practice because, as I noted above, Dolby Digital Plus was considered by many to be indistinguishable from the lossless track. Feel free to go back and read through the forum circa 2007, this was a hot topic at AVS. Not all Blu-Ray releases have lossless tracks either. It is not mandatory to the spec that a studio must release their titles with lossless vs lossy. I don't understand why some of you are so upset. If you don't like it, just rent the DVD and save the 30 cents, or wait for it to stream on Netflix or Amazon.
I suggest you do your homework before you jump to conclusions. My perspective. I prefer a lossless track. Even if I cannot hear the difference vs a lossy, there is no harm in the studios providing the lossless track if there is more than enough capacity on the disc. But a Blu-Ray release not having a lossless track would certainly not stop me from buying or renting it. In fact I own several movies that are lossy only and guess what? I enjoyed the movie....

Originally Posted by Foxbat121 

So, what you are saying is that no one can tell the differences between DTS-HD MA 7.1 track and DD 5.1 track? What's next, you gonna tell us no one can tell A down-mixed DD 2.1 track from DD 5.1 track ? So we should all be fine with a stereo track.
The two discs mentioned here both have DTS-HD MA 7.1 HD Audio in retail discs.
Worth or not worth the money is personal preference (not to mention when this fee was initiated, we got both HD audio and video). Just because you think it is worth it, doesn't mean everyone else has to agree. BTW, if you think HD PQ alone is good enough for BD, you should probably stop posting at AVS.

Originally Posted by Closet Geek 

When I rented The Three Stooges I felt the sound wasn't quite right. Assumed it was just a lackluster recording. Later I discovered it was DD 5.1. Days later I popped in my own copy of Iron Man 2. It didn't sound right. Pointed the finger at myself first, then realized the settings on my system were for some reason off. Switched them back and WOW! It was an entirely different viewing experience even at a lower volume level.

Originally Posted by Veeper 

This is because there is more data in the stream. What the lossy defenders are trying to argue is that to the unwashed masses, a 1gb 2.2hr audio file is the same as a 3.5gb 2.2hr audio file. No one can tell the difference.

Originally Posted by Closet Geek 

As you will note, I wasn't outright saying NF or RB was defrauding anyone. But rather your position will lead to such behaviors. There are no guarantees that lossless would be or will be provided, true enough. But again, who amongst any of us at the mention of BD and HD DVD way back when got excited about HD picture with lossy sound? That's simply not what was billed and as such not what is expected. Your point didn't go over my head. You quite simply are completely missing the point altogether. I can't speak of audiophiles on this site or any site for that matter but of the movies that I've viewed, I have been able to note a distinct difference in lossy vs. lossless. When I rented The Three Stooges I felt the sound wasn't quite right. Assumed it was just a lackluster recording. Later I discovered it was DD 5.1. Days later I popped in my own copy of Iron Man 2. It didn't sound right. Pointed the finger at myself first, then realized the settings on my system were for some reason off. Switched them back and WOW! It was an entirely different viewing experience even at a lower volume level. But none of this is the point. I 100% agree with you that most renters wouldn't find this to be a big issue if even an issue at all. This is because most people don't have home theater equipment to reap the benefits of a lossless track. But I pose this question to you, if you or they rented a BD and it had a standard def picture, do you think that would be an issue? Why don't they just do that? Keep the lossless audio and change the video, charge the premium and see what happens.
People wanted a better picture. So they go out and buy slick flat panels and BD players and pay extra either through purchase or rental for that better picture. But the other half of this is that some of us go the extra step and buy audio equipment to get better sound to go along with that better picture. Why? Because it's the full experience of what the medium has to offer. IMO, to not include lossless audio is to say that we don't matter. What about those of us that do have home theater systems?
To your point about Lionsgate, totally agree here, but who buys or rents BD's with the expectation of NOT having HD picture and sound? While some might not care about the sound, that doesn't mean it doesn't matter. At least not to the point of charging 25% more for it but not giving full value. You keep saying it's 30 cents. But our moms and wives (and some of us guys) will certainly will factor in what a 30 cent difference means on a 1lb package of rice versus a 2lb package of that same brand rice. One, it's about the overall value and two, it's about disclosure.
If BD rentals have been $1.30 all along for a full audio and video track then it seems justified over paying $1.00 for a DVD.
But if BD rentals remain at $1.30 but they change the full audio and video track to an inferior quality then this is not right.
However, they may make a policy decision and release an announcement that states "Due to rising costs...blah blah blah...we are no longer offering lossless audio...blah blah blah..." and a consumer can at that point make an informed choice whether to stick with them or not. But this was not and is not the case. They allowed people to continue to think they were getting something they weren't at the same cost. And by the time you discover something is wrong, they've already got your money. Yes, it's only 30 cents. But principle has to count for something, right?

Originally Posted by pbarach 

I have been a Netflix member with BluRay disc service for quite a while, and I can't recall a single disc that was mastered in hi-rez sound and arrived without it--they have all come with either DTS Master HD or Dolby TrueHD. In this thread, I see people mentioning two titles I haven't seen (Hunger Games and Cabin in the Woods).
So which BD's came from Netflix without hi-rez sound?

Originally Posted by kluken 

The studios are getting greedy and annoying. They are encouraging people to pirate movies because I can't even rent what I want any more! First they whacked the special features, like that is going to get me to pay $20 to watch a movie one time and now the audio. First I fault NetFlix for caving on this, buy the retail discs and add on say another $1-$2 a month to BD rentals. Clearly my selection of BD means I want the better audio/visual experience or I would opt for DVD or steaming. This would also solve the 28 day delay for rentals.

Originally Posted by ack_bk 

Because lossless is mostly just a marketing tool. I have good hearing. I have over $5K invested in my speakers and subwoofers in my home theater. I have Audysey MultiEQ running and I use REW and an SPL meter to measure my room to ensure there are no major room issues at play, and I have invested a lot of money in treating my room. I am saying all these things because I care about audio more than many people on this thread, and spend a ton of time in the audio forums here and at Audioholics and I also used to fight for lossless and make the claim that I wanted the best. Then I was put to the test and did double blind testing on numerous occasions and, once I level matched using Dolby Digital Plus vs TrueHD, I was shocked. No difference. What the audio experts had been saying all along was true. And while I still agree that they should give us lossless because they can, I am not going to lose my composure and start bitching about a 30 cent price difference at Redbox between a lossy and lossless track on a movie that I will most likely only watch once. If you don't like it, then don't give Redbox and Netflix your money and write letters. Perhaps look into another rental by mail company like GreenCine.
This is AVS forum. If you can hear the major differences in the audio as you claim between lossy and lossless then it can be measured. Please measure the tracks and show us what we are missing.

Originally Posted by Closet Geek 

I have no reason to doubt your findings and I as well have put painstaking time and money into my dedicated room. I have not gone through such measures to validate and/or verify the existence of sonic derivatives but what I can tell you is "blindly" I note sonic differences in audio formats. Some have more punch than others. Others are a tad bit more clear. Upon purchase or rentals, I don't even pay attention to formats. I wait and listen and let my ears decide. DTS, True HD, DD, whatever, they are all different to me as I check (validate) after viewing. At the end of the day, no, 30 cents doesn't matter. At the end of the day, I'll go about my life that includes things that I regard as far more important than tv's, speakers and blu rays. But there is a bottom line issue that I can't help but feel is getting overlooked. The principle of the matter. Only because I've lived enough years to know that these things start small. And you don't need to look any further than your corner gas station to see the historical effects of this. Sure, we can say and even agree that 30 cents is no big deal. But again, where does it stop. And it's widely known that corporations borrow best practices and when other studios, firms and industries start seeing the NF/RB models and our "it's only 30 cents" attitude...well, I've made my point.
Believe it or not, I've enjoyed the discussion but I, for one, will highly scrutinize that which I rent. Frankly, I already have because when I found out that Hunger Games couldn't be rented with DTS audio, I haven't rented from Redbox since the release of the movie. And my family and I were weekly renters. Granted, that's in part because there's been little of interest to rent but regardless, now, well...I do think about it. What's being done, or at least the way it's being handled simply isn't right IMO. And I stand on that.

Originally Posted by Closet Geek 

Believe it or not, I've enjoyed the discussion but I, for one, will highly scrutinize that which I rent. Frankly, I already have because when I found out that Hunger Games couldn't be rented with DTS audio, I haven't rented from Redbox since the release of the movie. And my family and I were weekly renters. Granted, that's in part because there's been little of interest to rent but regardless, now, well...I do think about it. What's being done, or at least the way it's being handled simply isn't right IMO. And I stand on that.

Originally Posted by ack_bk 

Fair enough. I guess I have a hard time arguing principle on a $1.50 rental. Look at the cost of watching the movie via Vudu, iTunes, PPV via Dish, etc. For HD you are looking at $4-6 a pop and that does not even match Blu-Ray video quality and will not give you lossless. Look, I would rather have the lossless than lossy track on anything I watch, but I also understand how cheap these movies are. New releases at Blockbuster in the early 2000's were $3-4 a pop usually, and that is not factoring in for inflation or the fact it was a DVD vs a BD.

Originally Posted by Foxbat121 

There are only a few titles on NF catalog that have this problem. You are correct, majority of the renters don't even know it. But those ppl also don't read AVS Forum either. My first encounter of such title is 'The Grey' rental disc but others claim they got the version with HD audio. So I chuckled that up as anomaly back then.

Originally Posted by PeterTHX 

DTS? Or DTS-MA? Because there's no quality difference between DTS and DD @640kbps.

Originally Posted by PeterTHX 

DTS? Or DTS-MA? Because there's no quality difference between DTS and DD @640kbps.
What else can you watch it in? Low quality non-OAR cablecast with DD 2.0?
Not to mention their DD bitrates are much less than 640kbps. Or worse yet, low bitrate MPEG-1 layer II stereo.

Originally Posted by PeterTHX 

DTS? Or DTS-MA? Because there's no quality difference between DTS and DD @640kbps.
What else can you watch it in? Low quality non-OAR cablecast with DD 2.0?
Not to mention their DD bitrates are much less than 640kbps. Or worse yet, low bitrate MPEG-1 layer II stereo.

Originally Posted by ack_bk 

Fair enough. I guess I have a hard time arguing principle on a $1.50 rental. Look at the cost of watching the movie via Vudu, iTunes, PPV via Dish, etc. For HD you are looking at $4-6 a pop and that does not even match Blu-Ray video quality and will not give you lossless. Look, I would rather have the lossless than lossy track on anything I watch, but I also understand how cheap these movies are. New releases at Blockbuster in the early 2000's were $3-4 a pop usually, and that is not factoring in for inflation or the fact it was a DVD vs a BD.

Originally Posted by RonAlam 

"Redbox doesn't have many movies PERIOD. (And even fewer BDs)"
Really?

Originally Posted by Xylon 

Outside AVS no one cares about lossless audio. That is the majority of the viewing public. Renting is perfectly fine for them.
For the rest of you guys just pay for the discs.

Originally Posted by CRGINC 

I was under the impression, perhaps incorrectly, that the standard audio for BD was DTS with DD being optional or the alternate versus DD being audio standard and DTS being optional for DVD movies. I would like to hear from one of the rental companies for an explanation. In 2007 I replaced a very good Sony BD player for a Denon just to get HD audio.