The only reason to buy Superbit... (1 Viewer)

[Peter Manojlovich]

My main reason for jettisoning my old versons of fifth element, gattaca, and dracula was to rid myself of the pan and scan versions of these films that reside on the opposite side of the widescreen versions. They're gone and now family members are stuck with those ugly black bars and there is no alternative of flipping the disc over.

I popped in dracula last night, enabled dts, and all I have to say, is that I could tell from the very first strand of music that the audio presentation was clearly superior to the old disc. Not even a close call in my opinion.

 

[Tom Bley]

I definatley notice an improvement in sharpness and detail in the Dracula SB as opposed to the original version. Dracula is the first SB title for me and I'm convinced. I viewed the movie on a Sony VPL W400Q lcd projector with a screen size of 45"x80". For me it was like getting new glasses. I also like the simplicity of the menus. Superbits gets my

 

[Sutjahjo Ngaserin]

quote "...As I reported in the last issue of TPV, when viewed through the best home-theater gear (at 720p or 1080p) Sony's Superbit Transfers are a major improvement over Sony's (excellent) earlier transfers of the same titles. (If you've read elsewhere that the differences between the old transfers and the new are minimal, then al I can say is that whoever is doing such reporting cannot be using a reference-quality system or paying close attention.)..."unquote
~Jonathan Valin, TPV Jan/Feb 2002, Short Takes, Page 125~

 

[Richard Kim]

I recently bought a 43" Hitachi 16:9 projection TV and a progressive scan DVD player. After calibrating with Avia, I decided to compare both versions of The Fifth Element on my setup. I chose to demo the opera sequence. I must say that the Superbit version had slightly better picture detail, but it was very subtle. I don't really see what the big fuss is about. Maybe I should demo a different scene from the movie?

 

[chris c]

Well, I can see a subtle improvement on the video side of things on a 32" Toshiba (Fifth Element, Gattaca, Desperado). Yet, it is the audio improvement that makes each Superbit title a lock for me. And on my "tricked-out" high end system it is most definitely worth the money

 

[Scott Strang]

I suppose you wouldn't notice if your boss gave you a 10% raise?

People with equipment good enough to see a 10% improvement don't get 10% raises.

 

[Michael Reuben]

Maybe I should demo a different scene from the movie?

Try the sequence beginning where Leeloo walks out onto the ledge high above the city and ending after Korben plunges the cab into the fog. The cityscape is rendered in incredible detail, and the superbits version lets you see much more of it.

M.

 

[Tony_Faville]

Personally, I have seen a difference when viewing the original releases of Dracula and The Fifth Element versus Superbits releases, especially TFE.

Then again, it could just be the minds eye seeing what it thinks it should see. Irregardless, I feel there is a difference.

At least there is no doubt with the DTS soundtracks...the difference is significant.

 

[Sebastian_A]

Re: DESPERADO Superbit
Alright, now I got my SECOND copy of this DVD, because no. 1 had a weird digitalization error in the fighting scene between the young guy and "Christos" - image just stopped and one could see all the pixelation - then it jumped 20 seconds ahead and the movie went on the way it was intended to.
Now, no. 2 shows the EXACT SAME ERROR - what is wrong? I tested this on SEVERAL DVD-Players - does NOONE have this problem? It DOES go well with a DVD-ROM drive, but a DVD-Player just does not seem to work.
PLEASE HELP if you can - thank you!
Sebastian.

 

[James Miller]

hmmmm, well I guess I fall somewhere between Joe Six Pack and Mr. Audio/Videophile... Don't have a 16:9 set, and just now (actually not until next week) am getting 5.1...
I love film- the films themselves, the making of films, the reasons fils are made, etc- thus I would rate my interest in "good" supplements (commentary, documentary, etc somewhat higher than a 10% improvement in a/v quality...
For Superbits that equates to somewhat of a mixed bag.... for 5th Element, for example, where there are no supplements on weither version, of course I would prefer Superbits...
If quality extras were eliminated to provide a SLIGHT A/V improvement I would forgo Superbits....
Example: if Citizen Kane were "Superbit-ized" with a slight A/V increase, but forgoing both commentaries and the second disc, I would avoid the SB version like the plague...
On the other hand, if we had a SB A/V presentation WITH ALL the extras- even for 25-50% more $ I would go with SB in a heartbeat....

 

[Bryant Trew]

Well, I'm thrilled at the improvement in Crouching Tiger. It is slight, but the impact is major. I can actually enjoy the film now... The first version was a heartbreaker. As for Dracula, the colours get a nice little boost. Not night and day, but the difference is there. Personally, I'd only take superbit over a loss of extras if the regular version had horrendous picture quality - CTHD.

 

[Chris Tinglin]

On the other hand, if we had a SB A/V presentation WITH ALL the extras- even for 25-50% more $ I would go with SB in a heartbeat....

James! SHHHH!! ixnay with with the offers to pay more, will ya? studio execs read this stuff from time to time don'tcha know?

 

[frank manrique]

When I first heard about Columbia's Superbit affair I thought it was just hype with the added bonus of a DTS soundtrack.

Then I read/saw Bjoern's stuff and really made me curious. Since a friend have bought the Superbit The Fifth Element, I asked him to bring it over for a quick check. That quick check didn't reveal much, but my interest was so high that I opted to buy it anyway.

Once I gave TFE Superbit version longer visual checks I came to the irrevocable conclusion that its image indeed is vastly superior over the original version...one that has been long held as some sort of reference quality. I sold my old copy immediately as I've bought the Superbit concept hook, line, and sinker; am a convert (but, damn it all... they should have done the SB thing from the beginning!).

My final conclusion is that since the Superbit process is a real advancement in image quality processing (as far as the 4:2:0 color space MPEG-2 compression is concerned), Sony has painted itself into a corner for nothing else they come up with now and in the future short being of Superbit quality will do; as consumers we'll lose...we'll be cheated.

I used this HT gear to view/assess/rate The Fifth Element and Bram Stoker's Dracula DVD transfers, both Superbit:

Dukane ImagePro 9015 D-ILA display device (professionally calibrated), HT-PC for DVD playback, 12 foot wide "scope" ratioed, 1.3 gain screen, Isco anomorphic lens attachment, Lexicon DC-1, Version 4.0 pre/pro, main, center (x2), side (x2) center rear surrounds (x2) rear surrounds (x2), and SVS 46/16 subwoofers (x8)...

-THTS

 

[Ivan Luk]

Don't forget one of the most overlooked feature of the SuperBit DVD's--seamless layer breaks!

 

[Mitchell Kaufman]

"...As I reported in the last issue of TPV, when viewed through the best home-theater gear (at 720p or 1080p) Sony's Superbit Transfers are a major improvement over Sony's (excellent) earlier transfers of the same titles. (If you've read elsewhere that the differences between the old transfers and the new are minimal, then al I can say is that whoever is doing such reporting cannot be using a reference-quality system or paying close attention.)..."
~Jonathan Valin, TPV Jan/Feb 2002, Short Takes, Page 125~
Question for Mr. Valin (or anyone who wishes to deputize for him): if the inherent resolution of the DVD format is only 480 lines, why would "the best home theater gear (at 720p or 1080p)" represent an improvement over a device that reproduces, say, 480p?
Just wondering.
MK

 

[Colin Jacobson]

Sony's Superbit Transfers are a major improvement over Sony's (excellent) earlier transfers of the same titles

What I don't understand: if the earlier transfers were "excellent", how can the new ones represent a "major improvement"? If the SB versions are so much better, then logically the old ones weren't "excellent" - "good", perhaps, but "excellent" is high praise for something that allegedly got bettered so radically...

 

[Michael Reuben]

What I don't understand: if the earlier transfers were "excellent", how can the new ones represent a "major improvement"?

The new ones go to 11!
Seriously: I think the point is that the bar has been raised. The original ones were excellent in their time, in comparison to everything up to that date, but now they've been demoted to "very good" by new developments.
M.

 

[Sutjahjo Ngaserin]

"the best home theater gear (at 720p or 1080p)"
First of all, I believe you can see obvious (not stunning, but very very obvious) difference by simply using a progressive scan DVD player and a 480p capable monitor. and that 720p or 1080i is not required...
But then, High-End HT Fans (not me, I am a mid end 480p guy, I buy mid-fi brands etc... ) have claimed for years that by using a line quadrupler and a high-end front projector, even VHS or LD looks much better and hence a better way to judge the differences of source materials.
This is a possible reason.

 

[Bjoern Roy]

If there is enough interest, i could write an article on why upscaling a 480p source to 720p or 960p is much better, although it doesn't seem natural at first.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

The original ones were excellent in their time, in comparison to everything up to that date, but now they've been demoted to "very good" by new developments.

See, I didn't interpret the statement to say that the old transfers WERE excellent - I thought it indicated that they still ARE excellent. One problem, of course, stems from the fact that the transfers themselves are the same in most cases; it's only the bitrates that have changed. But maybe I'm just being nitpicky...