any laserdisc titles still worth owning? (1 Viewer)

[Mark_Wilson]

I watched this the other night. Was amazed at the amount of detail in there. I had forgotten how good LD could look.

 

[Mattias_ka]

Well a lot of movies HAVE better image on LD than DVD. For exampel, the japanese open matte transfer of Santa Sangre havev better image than the 16:9 PAL DVD. That is a 10-12 year old LD!!
What player do you use?

 

[Albert Noel]

i found one that somewhat answers my own question, and anotherone to add to my list. the Criterion release of Akira on laserdisc has the original english dub where the dvd release has a new re-dubbed english version.

 

[David_B_K]

My player is a Pioneer CLD D406. I still do not see how a laserdisc will look better than a DVD (which has more resolution than the LD) on a 16:9 HDTV. I did mention that some DVDs are not mastered well. If the DVD version is poor, then the LD may well be better.

 

[Mattias_ka]

The D406 is not really a good player, and that are a big reason you will not get great PQ. Of course if a DVD is done right it will be better than a LD, but this is not what we are talking about. No DVD (or LD) is perfect.

 

[greg_t]

Mattias is right on this. If you tried your lasers on a player like the HLD-X9 (which I own), or the HLD-X0 (which mattias owns), you would see a great improvement. The cost of getting that level of improvement though is quite high. These players aren't cheap. So while some titiles may be better on LD through a high end player, the cost factor often brings DVD out on top.

 

[David_B_K]

I never said I had a great player. It does not even have a S-Video output. However, I bought it new in 199X, and it cost around $450. $450 was not cheap then, and it isn't now, and that was for an "OK" player only. If either of you are trying to make a case that laserdisc had PQ that rivals a well-mastered DVD, you should add the qualifier "on the highest-quality and most expensive laserdisc players". And even then, laserdisc will be a close second.

The guy who started the thread probably does not even have a player. If you are trying to convince people who missed the laserdisc craze that they should get one now, or that they are missing something in PQ, you should add that a player capable of producing (almost) as-good-as-DVD-quality will cost $1000 if he can even find one.

So, even though you both have (far) better players than mine, I still doubt the PQ is better than, or even as good as a well-mastered anamorphic DVD (particularly a widescreen one). I have an upconverting DVD player, that, while capable of better PQ than a standard 480p DVD player, is not capable of the PQ a HD DVD player or Bu-Ray is capable of. Even though I am satisfied with it, it doesn't make it as good as a HD player.

When I said Laserdisc PQ was not as good as DVD, I was meaning "in most cases". It seems it takes a top-of-the-line LD player to rival a less-than-$100 DVD player.

 

[Aaron Reynolds]

There's a lot of 4:3 program material, properly framed at that ratio, that is presented very well on LaserDisc. But regardless, the ultimate quality of LD really needs to be judged on what is put out by a good player -- we're not judging DVDs based on the first generation of players, or on $29 Wal-Mart specials. And let's face it -- there are at least as many bad DVDs out there as there are bad LaserDiscs.

Someone mentioned the Criterion commentary for Se7en -- in it, Brad Pitt mentions that Morgan Freeman gets so much work because all of the executives in Hollywood are in awe of him... because he taught them all how to read. Pitt also has some very interesting criticisms of the film that I personally thought were spot on, particularly about music choices. After listening to his comments, I stopped thinking of him as some pretty boy idiot actor. Really, it's a great commentary.

 

[Keith Paynter]

Alan Parker mentioned in the commentary that they "blew out a few speakers over the years" during the opening of "In The Flesh?" I remember sitting in a repetoiry theater in Toronto in the mid-80's where this was regularly shown, and the house system was LOUD! (and good times were had by all as a result )

IIR, the AC-3 mix on that third release was considered problematic. I did notice some bits missing on the DD mix, specifically some ADR soldier screams during "ITF" versus the previous PCM release.

 

[greg_t]

I agree with your statements. To get the most out of laserdisc, it costs a lot of money, and for most titles you get better performance on a cheap dvd player. There are still title however that are better on LD, especially with a good player. One example is Star Wars Episode I. I much prefer the LD. The image quality on DVD is only slightly better, the LD audio is much better, and the LD has the original theatrical cut without the goofy added scenes.

But many would argue that to get the most out of DVD, you need a great player. If someone came out saying that the Lord of the Rings DVD's look bad on their $50 player, someone would say they need a better player to get the most out of them. Same is true with LD. But I agree that in general dvd provides much better picture quality than LD even with a high end LD player. Audio is still another matter though.

 

[MarcoBiscotti]

.................................................. ..................................................


MGM CARTOON CLASSICS: HAPPY HARMONIES (1934-1937)

42 Complete MGM cartoon shorts


.................................................. ..................................................

 

[MarcoBiscotti]

Did I mention it's over 7 hours of some of the best classic cartoons of the mid-thirties...


*sigh*

 

[Albert Noel]

sounds like something to keep an eye out for.

 

[Mattias_ka]

Well, you are right about a great DVD will kick LD's a** anytime. The problem is that many DVD's are poor or average. Then, a well made LD can look better, even with a ok player, than the DVD. It can be that one prefer a slightly softer image over MPEG compression artifacts also. If the speced resolution are the only thing one look at, all NTSC DVD's should look the same, and PAL will always be better than NTSC. But what's really count is how they use the space on the DVD, and resolution is not everything (color, greyscale, sharpness, etc).
In most of the cases, DVD wins out, but there are a lot of cases the LD have better image, and we should not go into the PCM audio vs DD audio!

I think I have a rather good knowledge about PQ, with my 1080P Ruby projector, RP-82 DVD player (and also HTPC with GF 7900 GTX card) and my LD players HLD-X0 (7000$ NEW!), HLD-X9 and the others. I will try to point out when the image is slightly better, and maybe will not be better with a lesser player, or if the difference is big!

I'm working on a master list for LD's not on DVD and LD's with different cut's, extras etc. So please continue post people

 

[jim.vaccaro]

I know it's not the thread for it, but I'm thinking of selling a lightly used, CLD-D703 with remote and manual. What do you think I could get for it?

 

[David_B_K]

.

Understand that when i speak of better quality from DVDs, particularly anamorphic ones, I am speaking of movies with a 16:9 ratio or better.

 

[Mattias_ka]

You must still understand that a spec is nothing more than a spec. If they don't use it as they should, you will not get the PQ you should have. For example, one 10 years old analog NTSC LD transfer in open matt:



And to the 2003 PAL 16:9 transfer:



Not even do the DVD have 33% more resolution because it's anamorphic, it's also PAL with around 100 lines more resolution. And do it look sharper and more detailed?

 

[compson]

The 1936 version of Showboat. Directed by James Whale, featuring Paul Robeson, Irene Dunne, Helen Morgan, and and the disc includes fascinating commentary by Miles Kreuger. Boy, what a movie. And it's not available on DVD.

In addition to Ambersons, I'd also add The Last Picture Show--it's on DVD but without the commentary by Peter Bogdanovich.

 

[Aaron Reynolds]

I'm sure that, much like Alien and Star Wars, the difference is due to a different source being used -- the AC-3 mix is almost certainly derived from the 70mm six track version. Was the disc recalled? I remember it being in very short supply and hard to find.

 

[Adam Santangelo]

Without being at home to look at my LD collection, a few titles that spring to mind are:

Lost Highway - still no Region 1 widescreen release

Industrial Symphony No. 1 - rare David Lynch/Angelo Badalamenti stage performance featuring Nicolas Cage and Laura Dern as Sailor and Lula

On the Air and Hotel Room - I don't own these, but they're Lynch television shows that were only released on Japanese LD.

Glengarry GlenRoss - The Pioneer Special Edition LD featured a solo Jack Lemmon commentary (surprised they didn't port that over) and (I think) a different James Foley commentary from the DVD. It also included a printed copy of the original Mamet play.

Criterion 2001 and Strangelove - I don't own these, but I'm pretty sure the Kubrick-approved supplements (and Kubrick-designed packaging, in the case of Strangelove) have never been reproduced on DVD.

Pulp Fiction - You could probably justify hanging on to most Criterion LDs, but this one featured unique Tarantino-designed packaging and, as I recall, a lot of his participation inside the box also. He even added an extra fade out, late in the movie, to accomodate an LD side flip. Not sure if all the supplements were ported over for the very nice Miramax DVD.

Somebody already mentioned the Criterion release of Akira, but that's a big one I wish I had... I just watched my DTS DVD recently and realized that I'd gladly trade some image and sound quality for the original dub that I watched repeatedly as a kid.