or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › HDTV Software Media Discussion › Industry Insiders Q&A Thread: only Questions to insiders please
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Industry Insiders Q&A Thread: only Questions to insiders please - Page 23  

post #661 of 4623
Quote:
Originally Posted by deconvolver
Why couldn't a crystal controlled PLL be used to clean up the jitter without re-clocking the data bits? It has been awhile since I did this sort of hardware design but I think prctically any spec on jitter could be achieved via some refinement of this method, couldn't it?
I think we probably need to get off this topic before we get told to do so :). I should also preface that, I am at least a decade past the time I looked at this kind of thing :). So here goes one response anyway. If it is wrong, someone should create a new thread in the right place to disucss it further.

I am confident the HDMI recievers have a PLL that is used to recover the source signal/clock. The problem we have here though, is not just straight signal recovery as would be typical in these scenarios. But maintaing very precise timing relative to the original signal before it went through the HDMI transmitter. Put another way, the receiver may be able to nicely lock onto the transmitter, but if the transmitter is dancing back and forth, the recovered signal while digitally accurate, is also smeared in time.

Take the same data after the PLL and put it in a simple buffer, and then you can clock that out with precision. Down side is the delay and additional complexity. And you have to figure out what to do if your buffer underruns.
post #662 of 4623
Quote:
Originally Posted by dlb99
That sounds great Amir.

Would it be possible to burn such content to BD-R or HD-DVD-R and play such high-resolution content on an appropriate high-end BD or HD-DVD player?
It depends on whether they grant you what we call the "burn right." Publishers charge a few cents a song for every physical copy so this "right" doesn't come for free. And of course, all burning logic these days is for CDs. So new software would need to come about to burn it to HD formats and at higher sampling rate. But then the content owners may require some for of copy protection to be used which off hand, I am not sure what it would be as AACS can not be generated by consumers.

The best solution is what we already have. That is, stream the source from the PC and be done with it. Xbox 360 can do it already. Indeed, all we need is a bit of extra software and every HD DVD player with an Ethernet port can do it. Pioneer BD player has this capability but I am not sure if it can handle > CD resolution though (i.e. WMA Pro).

Quote:
I'd want to get such content out of my PC (my PC speakers suck) and into my main rig (no I don't want to hook my PC to my system) :)
Per answer above, an network audio receiver would do the job nicely. New receivers should start having this functionality built-in.

Quote:
Secondly album covers (and backs) are important. Such digital downloads should allow people to create something that almost looks like it was purchased from a store (rather than looking like PC pirate job). It'd want something that looks good in my CD shelf (covers, booklets are important to me).
Agreed. And there should be some nice solutions on this soon.
post #663 of 4623
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talkstr8t
rdjam, rather than trying to define specific BD-J API's or subsets, I'll lay it out out very clearly:

BD-Video profile does not require PiP, network, and enhanced persistent storage support, though any of those features may be present if a manufacturer chooses to include them. BD-Live profile requires all those features. All other capabilities are present in all BD players regardless of profile. BD-J content not requiring PiP, network, or enhanced persistant storage facilities will operate on all BD players. BD-J content requiring those facilities will work on all BD-Live players. Content requiring one or more of those capabilities on a BD-Video player without support for that capability will either provide a suitable error message, provide reduced capability, or not be available, depending on how the content developer chooses to author the content.

I can't get any more clear than this, and the concept really should not be as difficult as you're making it sound.

- Talk

So is this a crapshoot with the BD players at least with the 1G?
post #664 of 4623
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luke M
The design issues are the same whether the audio is compressed or not. The receiver has no way to tell the source, "my buffer is getting full, slow down", or "my buffer is getting empty, speed up". The receiver has to accept the audio at whatever speed the source sets. This is true for SPDIF, and it's true for HDMI also.
That has nothing to do with jitter. If the data is so far out of sync that the buffer is exhausted on the receiving device, then you'd lose the signal completely while the HDMI interface resynced. But there's no way you can suggest that minor fluctuations in the clock sending compressed data over a very high-speed link somehow affects the timing of the very low-speed data sent to the D/A converters after it's decompressed, decrypted, buffered, etc. That is purely a concept made up by the companies that want to sell you $250 HDMI cables.

--
Steve
post #665 of 4623
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm
I think we probably need to get off this topic before we get told to do so :). I should also preface that, I am at least a decade past the time I looked at this kind of thing :). So here goes one response anyway. If it is wrong, someone should create a new thread in the right place to disucss it further.

I am confident the HDMI recievers have a PLL that is used to recover the source signal/clock. The problem we have here though, is not just straight signal recovery as would be typical in these scenarios. But maintaing very precise timing relative to the original signal before it went through the HDMI transmitter. Put another way, the receiver may be able to nicely lock onto the transmitter, but if the transmitter is dancing back and forth, the recovered signal while digitally accurate, is also smeared in time.

Take the same data after the PLL and put it in a simple buffer, and then you can clock that out with precision. Down side is the delay and additional complexity. And you have to figure out what to do if your buffer underruns.
Don't you already have the additional complexity, since there are so many different interfaces running at different speeds inside an HD-DVD player? I mean, the timing of an HDMI signal isn't even in the same ballpark as the timing of digital audio or video streams that you might construct from data passed over HDMI. Plus I assume that the audio data is buffered since it generally takes longer to process and scale the video than the audio.

--
Steve
post #666 of 4623
OK, someone please ask an HD DVD/BD question before we all get in trouble :D....
post #667 of 4623
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm
I think we probably need to get off this topic before we get told to do so :). I should also preface that, I am at least a decade past the time I looked at this kind of thing :). So here goes one response anyway. If it is wrong, someone should create a new thread in the right place to disucss it further.

I am confident the HDMI recievers have a PLL that is used to recover the source signal/clock. The problem we have here though, is not just straight signal recovery as would be typical in these scenarios. But maintaing very precise timing relative to the original signal before it went through the HDMI transmitter. Put another way, the receiver may be able to nicely lock onto the transmitter, but if the transmitter is dancing back and forth, the recovered signal while digitally accurate, is also smeared in time.

Take the same data after the PLL and put it in a simple buffer, and then you can clock that out with precision. Down side is the delay and additional complexity. And you have to figure out what to do if your buffer underruns.

I bolded that in Amirs' response. What he is referring to is called Time of Day. That is not only does your TX/RX have to get where they are supposed to be at the right time, but the when is also very important too.

The solution is a Stratum 2 clock, but then the prices of the players would shoot, "Straight to the Moon, Alice:! :D
post #668 of 4623
Quote:
Originally Posted by darinp2
Maybe I'm missing something, but MMC has been something I've seen you pushing as an advantage of HD DVD over Blu-ray. So, if it impacts both formats equally, does HD DVD have an advantage over Blu-ray as far as MMC? If so, what is it?

--Darin
You don't like this guy do you?
post #669 of 4623
Nice explanation Amir re high-quality digital audio downloads, thanks.

It'd still want something I can hold in my hand rather than go the streaming route. That's why I like BD and HD-DVD (I can hold it, store it and be proud of my collection).

I'll keep an eye on what actually transipers. The content providers need to be carefull, place too many hurdles in front of legitimate consumers risks losing those consumers who end up say "this is not worth the hassle". A fine line indeed balancing content owners vs consumers rights and protections.

Thanks.

Dennis.
post #670 of 4623
Quote:
Originally Posted by alfbinet
You don't like this guy do you?
I love Darin and respect him a lot. Folks working for me vouch for him to high heaven on top of that. It is just that he is asking a complex question that created many debates last year, and when I answered a similarly complex one in another topic, he got quite upset at me. So I have not yet figured out how to reply to him.

Please, please, let's not continue with these side discussions. I am in San Diego, going for a nice dinner anyway. When I come back, I expect to see nice, simple questions. :) Someone must want to know something. Like who is producing the first AVC title in US in HD DVD!
post #671 of 4623
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm
OK, someone please ask an HD DVD/BD question before we all get in trouble :D....
OK, maybe the third time will be the charm :p

How about this one?
post #672 of 4623
ok i have an HD DVD question. If anyone knows, why has WB been silent, i was expecting they would release a few titles next Tuesday but their normal Thursday announcement time has come and gone. :(
post #673 of 4623
Quote:
Originally Posted by static14
ok i have an HD DVD question. If anyone knows, why has WB been silent, i was expecting they would release a few titles next Tuesday but their normal Thursday announcement time has come and gone. :(
Good question, even their on-line store is behind the times and doesn't list their latest title ATL. http://whv.warnerbros.com/WHVPORTAL/...functionmode=6
post #674 of 4623
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnbe
I am assuming that at some point they will region code the discs and then try to force a firmware update so you can not play these discs from other regions. It could be put on a region 1 disc here and simply say to play this disc you must update your firmware. Then it would disregard any other similar type message for updating from another region. I would hope there would be a way around this.
One which I will not accept thank you.
post #675 of 4623
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm
I think we probably need to get off this topic before we get told to do so :). I should also preface that, I am at least a decade past the time I looked at this kind of thing :). So here goes one response anyway. If it is wrong, someone should create a new thread in the right place to disucss it further.

I am confident the HDMI recievers have a PLL that is used to recover the source signal/clock. The problem we have here though, is not just straight signal recovery as would be typical in these scenarios. But maintaing very precise timing relative to the original signal before it went through the HDMI transmitter. Put another way, the receiver may be able to nicely lock onto the transmitter, but if the transmitter is dancing back and forth, the recovered signal while digitally accurate, is also smeared in time.

Take the same data after the PLL and put it in a simple buffer, and then you can clock that out with precision. Down side is the delay and additional complexity. And you have to figure out what to do if your buffer underruns.
This may be one post too many on this topic but I think there is room for slightly more clarification. There are two sources of timing errors in a received digital audio stream: One, the timing errors of the clock in the source device; these errors are common to both the clock and data bits. Two, jitter in the received clock due to errors in the sensing of the received clock transitions caused by such items as ground noise and cross talk contaminating the clock signal. Reducing the second type of clock error can be done with an ordinary PLL with a tight loop filter or at more expense with a crystal controlled PLL and an even tighter loop filter. Since the second type of timing error doesn't affect the clocking of data bits at the source, reducing it does not require any extra data buffering beyong the register already built into the receiver. Eliminating the first source of timing errors does require buffering though and extremely tight PLL loop filters intended to eliminate jitter could also uncover some of the first type of timing errors thus necessitating some buffering. The use of compression of course has no effect on whether or not the clock the receiver recovers from the source contains timing errors.
post #676 of 4623
I don't know if you can answer any of these due to agreements, but it's worth a try:

-Apparantly the iHD advocates at Disney couldn't overcome their BD-J supporters. Do you know if there are still people at Disney that care for this technology, or have they moved on/no longer work there?

-Once a studio encodes/authors a title in one format (let's say WB), is it basically a no-cost situation in doing a port to another (HD DVD VC-1 encode being used for Blu-ray for example)? This is supposing it would fit on whatever size discs were being used (let's say a 10GB movie for arugment's sake).

-On a scale of 1-10, how would you rate the relationship in HD DVD movie collaboaration with the studios for VC-1 support and disc checking/review? My guess would be a 9 or so for Warner and Universal, 8 for Studio Canal, and 5 for Paramount (this based of what Microsoft has made known publicy).

-What are the chances we see Weinstein titles before the end of the year?

-Do you expect the same effort from Studio Canal that Warner and Universal gave with their titles (visuals + audio + extras)?

-If you were a betting man, what would you rate the chances of another studio announcing HD DVD support before Jan. 1st here in the US (any of the 5 "major" not yet supporting HD DVD) - less than 50%, or more than 50%?




p.s. thanks for all your answers so far
post #677 of 4623
Amir:

That is great news on the Studio Canal releases being compatible with the Toshiba HD DVD player in the U.S. Do you have any news on whether the extras from these non-U.S. releases will be viewable as well? Will they be in PAL format and therefore not compatible with NTSC sets here?

Oh, yes, and who, pray tell, is producing the first AVC title in the US in HD DVD?

SCD
post #678 of 4623
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amirm
OK, someone please ask an HD DVD/BD question before we all get in trouble ....
I think this one was missed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PathofNeo
Forgive me if this has been brought up, but I'de like to know a couple things about the 360's external hd-dvd player before I spend $500 on the Toshiba....

1) Knowing that the decoder is by ATI and will be using the GPU to decode the video, can one expect similar PQ as in the current Toshiba hd player? <--- I'm not concerned with audio and other bells and whistles...just PQ. Can it even be predicted now?

2) Will the external hd-dvd player be able to upconvert standard dvds? If so...component? Hdmi? VGA?

A big thank you for answering these two questions and if they can't be answered I totally understand. :)
post #679 of 4623
Thanks Rover :). Yes on #1. On #2, yes to component but not being 480p that is mandated for analog out (same as Toshiba/Samsung, etc.). No comment on HDMI one way or the other :).
post #680 of 4623
I'm keen on the answer to this one as posted before:

Quote:
Carrying on the audio theme for a while, the following link from Dolby themselves indicates that most HD titles (doesn't specify either particular format) will actually prevent the higher definition audio bitstreams from being sent from the player.

http://www.dolby.com/consumer/techn...eHD_avrs_3.html

So the question is does either Blu-ray or HD-DVD have such a facility built in and has it actually been used on any of the titles so far that carry sound with any of the new codecs?
Thanks, Ian.
post #681 of 4623
Amir,

You talked about noone being able to force you to update your firmware if region codes were ever added to the HD-DVD spec. With the Xbox 360 HD-DVD addon, would HD-DVD software updates be bundled with XBOX Live software updates? What I am really asking is if Microsoft would be able to force you to update your HD-DVD software, if you wanted to continue using Xbox Live.

Cheers.
post #682 of 4623
Amir,

Let me try this another way (I'm not on your ignore list, am I? : :confused:

Here is a post by "dr1394", Ron, who I don't know but have read some of his posts and seems to know his stuff:
Quote:
The 1080i@29.97 video bitstream structure of HD-DVD prevents decoders from generating 1080p@23.976 output. Although the telecine flags may describe a perfect 23.976 coded pictures per second on current HD-DVD movies, there is no specification (MPEG-2, VC-1, H.264 or the HD-DVD specification itself) that says this must be so. In fact, the telecine flags can describe a bitstream with any amount (between 23.976 and 29.97) of coded pictures per second.

Because the telecine flags are variable, the decoder cannot ignore them and hope to properly decode all legal 1080i@29.97 bitstreams. The decoder must pay strict attention to repeat_first_field and top_field_first flags. Therefore, for HD-DVD the decoder will always output at 1080i@29.97 by repeating fields as instructed from the 23.976 coded pictures per second on the disc.

1080p@23.976 output from HD-DVD is a non-starter. However, 1080p@59.94 is definitely possible from the next generation of HD-DVD players with the inclusion of a deinterlacing chip (like the Samsung Blu-ray player).

Ron
Here is a post by me in which I was asking for input on this issue, as it contradicted what I'd previously believed wrt HD DVD and progressive output:
Quote:
I would also like more insider opinions on this 1080p issue; it's been discussed in several other threads, but I'd be interested in opinions from folks like Stacey, Ben, Amir, Keith, and Tom (and anyone else I may have left out with experience in this area). I have two concerns:

1-I'd like to know that an HD DVD player could one day output 1080p without the player going through an interlace phase (not suggesting this will be possible with the current Tosh; just in general for the format). In my case this would be for future use, as I don't currently own a 1080p compatible display.

2-I'd like to know if there is a reasonable possibility that a future HD DVD player could produce 720p without going thru an interlace mode (if that's the correct word). In other words, take the 1080p/24 that's encoded on the disk, scale to 720, and perform whatever framerate conversion is necessary to output 720p (which presumably would be 720p/60 at the output for compatiblity with current displays). This is a more immediate concern of mine; I have a Pio plasma that is (approx) 720p; and I would prefer that it receive a pure progressive source. Is that possible, or is all this flagging talk (most of which I don't understand) going to make that impossible or unlikely. From some of Stacey's posts of a year ago I thought that HD DVD had no issues with regard to getting a "true" progressive output, but after Don's post I guess now I'm not sure whether that was actually explicitly stated.
Here is another post by me directed to you, as no one had responded (maybe I'm on everyone's ignore list :p ):

Quote:
Amir,

While you're here , any comments on this post of mine (from yesterday in this thread)? No one has responded to it, and am curious as to the position of the insiders wrt getting progressive video off of an HD DVD without going thru a interlace-de-interlace process somewhere in the chain. From previous posts by Stacy (from a year ago) I had gotten the idea (perhaps mistakenly) that this was trivial for HD DVD; a recent post by "dr1394" (Ron) seems to suggest otherwise.
Finally here is my last post on the subject:


Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm
Quote:
OK, someone please ask an HD DVD/BD question before we all get in trouble ....

OK, maybe the third time will be the charm

How about this one?
The last just links back to the previous. I'd just like some input. It doesn't have to be the last word, can be clarified later, etc; but basically when everyone on here pretty much came to an agreement that "HD DVD is encoded 1080p", despite the flag or header difference to BD; and I had assumed that there would be no issue in getting "pure" progressive material off the disc; now Ron seems to be saying that the only way is to de-interlace ala the Sammy.

Thanks,
post #683 of 4623
Re: 1080P, I would like to suggest that people be a bit more precise about the term "deinterlacing". Removing the 3:2 sequence ("Inverse Telecine") is often a relatively simple-minded process that only takes a state machine and very little compute resources.

True deinterlacing (phase correlation, motion adaptive, temporal upconversion, etc.) can be extremely expensive to implement - it is generally far more complex than simple inverse telecine.

Clearly differentiating between these two concepts may help deconfuse some of the discussions I've seen here (and on other parallel threads).

Just a thought.
post #684 of 4623
Amir...

So I listened to the Xbox podcast about HD DVD.

Kevin Collins said that in the future you will be able to download new HD trailers to your persistent storage on the HD DVD player. This I can buy.

He also said that you might also be able to download a director's cut. How is this possible? Will the HD DVD player read from the HD DVD disc and then jump to the on-board memory to read a new scene, and then jump back to read from the HD DVD disc again?
post #685 of 4623
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom McMahon
Re: 1080P, I would like to suggest that people be a bit more precise about the term "deinterlacing". Removing the 3:2 sequence ("Inverse Telecine") is often a relatively simple-minded process that only takes a state machine and very little compute resources.

True deinterlacing (phase correlation, motion adaptive, temporal upconversion, etc.) can be extremely expensive to implement - it is generally far more complex than simple inverse telecine.

Clearly differentiating between these two concepts may help deconfuse some of the discussions I've seen here (and on other parallel threads).

Just a thought.
Is it safe to assume when you speak of the above "True deinterlacing" you are refering to a source that was captured (ie 1080i 30fps video) vs. a "created" 1080i 30fps that was captured as 24fps film ?

b2b
post #686 of 4623
Quote:
Originally Posted by b2bonez
Is it safe to assume when you speak of the above "True deinterlacing" you are refering to a source that was captured (ie 1080i 30fps video) vs. a "created" 1080i 30fps that was captured as 24fps film ?

b2b
Two examples would be:

1) 1080I30 captured source (sometimes called 1080I60) to 1080P30 or 1080P60

2) 1080P24 captured source carried in a 1080I30 "container" (with 3:2 cadence) temporally upconverted/resampled to 1080P30, 1080P48, 1080P60, or 1080P72. (And I don't just mean simple frame repeats.)
post #687 of 4623
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom McMahon
Two examples would be:

1) 1080I30 captured source (sometimes called 1080I60) to 1080P30 or 1080P60

2) 1080P24 captured source carried in a 1080I30 "container" (with 3:2 cadence) temporally upconverted/resampled to 1080P30, 1080P48, 1080P60, or 1080P72. (And I don't just mean simple frame repeats.)
Thanks for the reply. I could see where that could be a nasty bit of work to deal with. Are we speaking of FLI8638 "expensive" or even more than that ? Do any of the Broadcom chipsets seek to address this level of processing ?

b2b
post #688 of 4623
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnthonyP
That way the music could also be the movies soundtrack (as a menu item , play song#1, #2 and the movie at that point as the video)
The DVD release of the anime .Hack//Sign (at least the original series, I haven't seen anything else) had in addition to the usual English / Japanese audio tracks, a soundtrack-only track. Yummy :)
post #689 of 4623
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom McMahon
Re: 1080P, I would like to suggest that people be a bit more precise about the term "deinterlacing". Removing the 3:2 sequence ("Inverse Telecine") is often a relatively simple-minded process that only takes a state machine and very little compute resources.

True deinterlacing (phase correlation, motion adaptive, temporal upconversion, etc.) can be extremely expensive to implement - it is generally far more complex than simple inverse telecine.

Clearly differentiating between these two concepts may help deconfuse some of the discussions I've seen here (and on other parallel threads).

Just a thought.
Tom -

I think the problem is you can only use the "relatively simple-minded process that only takes a state machine" under those conditions where you are already certain that you have pure telecined 24p material. If the source has been edited as interlaced or processed as interlaced in the player to add PIP, overlays, etc., or if the decoder cannot assure you that it is 24p then you have to assume the worst and feed everything into the sausage maker.

- Tom

edit: While not a hidef DVD insider I have indeed professionally worked on program code to do most of the above on previous projects.
post #690 of 4623
[quote=Tom McMahon][quote=rdjam]Hi Tom - Can the Broadcom chips in the A1 output the 1080p24 video it is decoding on HD DVD?
Quote:
Yes.

Tom, can your decoder output 1080p24sf? When you say that 1080p24 is possible, is it with your current firmware? I know that the manufacturers of the players would have to update their firmware, but I am asking about the present Broadcom firmware.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: HDTV Software Media Discussion
This thread is locked  
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › HDTV Software Media Discussion › Industry Insiders Q&A Thread: only Questions to insiders please