Buena Vista Goes All BD-50 for January Blu-ray Slate (1 Viewer)

[Robert Crawford]

So am I, most people won't even listen to more than one track and placing two on a disc only serves a very small segment of consumers.




Crawdaddy

 

[ppltd]

I agree. One lossless is adequate.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Agreed that encoding the same track twice in two lossless codecs is redundant.

He probably means the 2nd lossless track for music-only or a 2nd language track. And while most films have a clearly defined primary language, that's not always the case (many Disney animated films are created with more than one "main" language in mind). And most audiophiles would love to get the music-only track in 24/96 lossless! I know that I would.

I think that music-only tracks would be the main reason why 2 lossless tracks would be great to have on some titles (one lossless for the film's primary soundtrack and the 2nd of the music-only track).

 

[Grant H]

I used to think it would be pointless to have 2 lossless audio tracks as well, but I certainly see cases where they would be very good to have.

Interestingly, with Dolby and DTS each having a lossless codec, there is the option to present two different theatrical mixes on the same disc. As has OFTEN been pointed out, sometimes the sound mixes used are not the same when comparing Dolby Digital and DTS tracks, so perhaps the identical mix would not be presented on both tracks at all. I really see this as the only case you'd have a mix of DD/DTS lossless tracks on the same disc, and I wonder how likely it is we'd ever see such a thing, but it sure would be interesting.

But, more importantly, isolated scores could be presented losslessly (as has been mentioned) OR multiple mixes. A good example would be the original soundmix of Superman AND the 5.1 remix, both presented losslessly. This could be a big plus for older catalog titles that have original mixes and remixes! As far as space goes, think how many mixes Star Wars has! With enough space (and the medium's ability to track them all), all the mixes (at least 1 or 2 lossless) could be presented in the original language with space leftover for the multiple language tracks.

As for length, a lot of longer movies DON'T have planned intermissions, mostly it's older fare like Gone With the Wind. ROTK theatrical was about 3.5 hours with no intermission. The extended version clocks in at over 4 hours. The extended versions were broken on the discs originally (I don't recall if they squeezed them onto one for the re-releases), but there wasn't really a true intermission in those films. I know the extended cuts (at least 2 of them) were later screened theatrically. Did those have intermissions there? More likely just between films, right?

I'm in the camp that would like to keep long films with no originally conceived intermission (which is likely the majority of them, at least modern films) on one disc. If that's the original theatrical intention, we should be able to get that original theatrical presentation at home. That's what home theater, particularly HD is all about, re-creating the theatrical experience. You can always hit pause whenever you have to pee.

There are a lot of films around the 3 hr mark with no intermissions (like James Cameron extended cuts) that could benefit from the space to give you the entire film with the best possible video and the lossless soundtrack(s). I don't know how much more efficient compression will become. It's even possible that films like King Kong could easily fit one lossless soundtrack along with the film on one disc. Maybe it just hasn't happened yet. Everything's in its infancy.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Grant. good point. That's a good opportunity for multiple lossless tracks as well... perhaps a lossless for the original film mix plus a lossless for the new 5.1 mix. I'd love to have the 2.0 mix losslessly encoded for Superman, along with a lossless 5.1 of the new mix.

BTW, in such cases one doesn't need to use different codecs. Both mixes could be in DTS-HD or both could be in Dolby True HD.

What I like about BD is that with 50% more bandwidth than HD DVD, on a 50 gig disc there'd be plenty of space *and* bandwidth for features like this without compromising any PQ. From what I've heard, the limits of HD DVD were the reason that Universal didn't provide a lossless track for Kong... they felt it would have taken too much bandwidth from the image and potentially compromised the picture (though it's possible that advances with VC1/AVC over the coming years could improve efficiency and make that less of an issue, though even Amir at AVS has stated HD DVD would have a very hard time presenting more than one lossless track given the bandwidth constraints). Also keep in mind that a 24/96 lossless track takes up almost twice the space/bandwidth of a 16/48 track! More space/bandwidth=better for everybody.

In case anyone is confused by what bandwidth is, it's not the total storage space that is referred to by 30 or 50 gigs, but rather it's the "max sustained read rate" of data that can be read off the disc in a given unit of time. BD allows a read-rate 1.5 x that of HD DVD... so you could store more stuff in the same "stream" on BD and maintain the same level of image/sound quality.

The studios have yet to really take advantage of many of these capabilities of BD, though we'll start to see some special editions make use of them over the coming year. When LOTR comes to BD, expect it to make full use of the additional bandwidth *and* bit-space. I've got a suspician (hope) that BV's Narnia BD may start to dabble in some of these areas as well... but that title may emerge too soon before Disney really gets their head around all this new capability.

 

[MarekM]

CEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEES

I said that SOOOOOOOOOO MANY TIMES

one is for MUSIC ONLYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

Marek

 

[MarekM]

As I mentioned several times, on different threads, second one is only for music....

I am sorry if two moderators from this FORUM thought that I want TWO SAME SOUNDTRACKS :frowning: :frowning: :frowning:

no I don't want that... and I am sorry for CONFUSION....

 

[Cees Alons]

Marek,



(You've chosen wisely!
... although I personally don't need that.).


Cees

 

[MarekM]

I am glad to HEAR THAT !! but it could be so cool, to hear all John Williams scores, scores from LOTR, some older EPIC movies... etc etc etc...

IN DOLBY TRUE HD or DTS HD MASTER !

Marek

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Agreed! Star Wars... LOTR... Amadeus all with 24/96 lossless music-only tracks...

Sigh... it would be like a free DVD-A along with your high-def movie!

 

[MarekM]

yes ! exactly.....

Marek

 

[Robert Crawford]

Do you really think the studios would do this based on their recent history of staying away from offering music-only tracks? I doubt the artists involved with these musical scores will allow this without some further compensation, thus, such costs are passed on to the consumers.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Robert,

WB has already released music-only tracks on some of their HD DVD and BD titles (though they haven't pushed the envelop by going lossless/high-res yet).

Peter Jackson wanted to put music-only tracks on the LOTR DVD extended editions but had to cut them because it hurt the PQ of the disc.

The point is that there will be titles where lossless music-only tracks are legitamate options. That's just one good thing (among many) you can do with more bandwidth.


Just like we pay for commentary along with royalties for other special features (including music-only tracks) on DVD now. Nothing radically different here. Just eliminating the problem of limited bandwidth which right now forces disc producers to make a compromise if they want music tracks on DVD and HD DVD given format constraints. On BD they could go lossless instead.

 

[Pete T C]

Why give lossless Dolby TrueHD the head start when one of your major investments is in the competition - lossless DTS-HD Master Audio.

Also, re: BD50. Buena Vista could easily have used up exactly 30gb for use on both HD DVD and Blu-Ray with 20gb unused space. Or, Buena Vista could have used no more than 30gb for the film audio/video/menus and then have 20gb of extras which could be placed on a 2nd disc for a 2-disc CE HD DVD version. Many different ways how BV could require more than BD25 yet still be encoding the content so it can be used on either format. Or, BV could eventually do HD DVD and BD completely seperate like Paramount does now. We won't know until the discs come out.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Pete,

The WB lossless true HD tracks so far have only been 16/48. That's why they take up the same space as the lossy (24 bit) track on Kong. Were Kong to have gone lossless, it would probably have doubled the bit-rate on top of that.

A general rule of thumb is that a 24 bit lossless track will take about twice the bandwidth/space of a 16 bit lossless track.

And we want 24...

 

[Robert Crawford]

Which discs has Warner released with music only tracks? I have over a 100 HD or Blu-ray discs and I don't remember any of them having a music only track.

Also, I don't want the music only tracks if they cause the price of the software not to drop.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Corpes Bride is one in my collection that does (BD). I'm pretty sure there are others (I also remember reading that their Charlie and the Chocolate Factory is another disc that is planned to have a music-only track though the specs may change before release). WB has also been known to put music-only tracks on some of the DVD releases so it's not anything unusual for the studio.

However, allow me to put my usual caution out there to anyone trying to extrapolate the future implimention of either format based on just the first few months of early production discs. What we're seeing from the studios right now is just barely scratching the surface of the kind of disc sets and special features we'll be enjoying over the next few years. Just like with DVD, the studios will take their time ramping up but when they're ready, it will be impressive. Will every BD or HD DVD out there have a music-only track? Of course not. My only point is that the technical reasons that prevent such features on current DVD and HD DVD editions will be moot on BD. The reason that Jackson dropped his music-only track from Return on the King on DVD wasn't because of royalties or poltical reasons... he and his fans wanted it on there... he dropped it because the technical limitations of the DVD format forced him to. With BD that music track could be provided... and in 24/48 lossless resolution.

 

[Robert Crawford]

You would pick a title that I don't have in my collection, but what others are there or are you just guessing there are others? Also, is that a lossless track? Such a track could possibly require further compensation for the artists since they're basically a DVD-A type product.

 

[Tim Glover]

Amen.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

I doubt you'll have to worry. Have you had to pass over any DVD special editions because of the price-hikes brought on by music-only tracks even when present? Most DVD special features have the added royalty costs mitigated by the increased sales the bonus material usually encourage. If the studio doesn't think it can charge a reasonable price for a title then a feature, whatever it may happen to be, gets dropped.