Warner Bros.: which titles "deserve" lossless audio?

I don't want to be overly rancorous in addressing this, but the lamentable trend of Warner Bros. giving certain Blu-ray releases lossy DD5.1 audio instead of the lossless treatment continues to disappoint me. We've already gone through this with "Speed Racer", which either (a) didn't make enough money at the box office to "deserve" lossless audio, or (b) doesn't need lossless audio because it's a "kids movie," whatever that inexplicable logic means. (It reminds me of Disney's marketing MAR-ed live-action releases as being presented in "family friendly widescreen," as if thick black bars was a leading cause for broken homes in this country.)

So now we have another announced release from Warners, "Kit Kittredge: An American Girl," with Abigail Breslin, Stanley Tucci, et al. I never got around to seeing it in theaters, but it did pretty well with critics (79% on RT), and it looks like a nice rental. It had fairly modest box office, about $17M, but with a reported budget of only $10M, this is hardly the financial catastrophe for WB that "Speed Racer" was.

Well, you can probably guess what's coming next . . . here's the back cover art for the Blu-ray release of "Kit Kittredge":

Kit Kittredge: An American Girl

No extras (granted, there may not have been the budget to produce any), and lossy DD5.1 audio. This is not exactly an unprofitable movie for Warners (at least, after DVD sales/rentals, it won't be), so what's going on? Is lossless audio somehow not "family friendly"? What decision rubric is being applied here? Apparently blockbuster family hits like "Harry Potter" get lossless. But something like "Iron Giant," if and when it comes to Blu-ray, probably won't.

I just don't get it.

Re: Warner Bros.: which titles "deserve" lossless audio?

I think the issue here is may be which disc type is being used: single layer of 25 GB or dual-layer of 50 GB. A single layer Blu-Ray disc is cheaper and probably easier to produce than a dual-layer (and I seem to recall an issue with reliability of yields for DL discs early on), but has less capacity than an HD-DVD, which may explain why it sounds like some Universal BR reissues of HD-DVD titles actually required applying more DNR and/or compression to fit this time around. And this would mean less space available for a lossless audio track. I would assume non "A"-list releases would not go the dual-layer route but might also be sold for a bit less retail as a result?

Howard

Re: Warner Bros.: which titles "deserve" lossless audio?

As I recall, some of the early materials for Speed Racer promised lossless audio. The lesson should be obvious: Don't rely too much on initial PR releases.

M.

Re: Warner Bros.: which titles "deserve" lossless audio?

My answer to the title of this thread is "all of them". Even if the movie was a poor box office performer or an older catalog title with a mono soundtrack, all titles deserve to have lossless audio on Blu-ray. It just doesn't make sense why any studio would go not include lossless audio.

Even the budget Blu-ray releases from Echo Bridge have lossless and they are on BD25s, too.

Re: Warner Bros.: which titles "deserve" lossless audio?

Yes, the early press materials for "Speed Racer" featured the Dolby TrueHD logo, but the back cover art said Dolby Digital 5.1. (I'm crossing my fingers for the actual BD review, but I'm not getting my hopes up too high that the back cover spec is incorrect.) The site I linked to for "Kit Kittredge" features the back cover art, which is where I got my info. While they don't have perfect reliability, cover art specs are much less subject to change than early press releases.

I remember all this from '06! vvv

Sacrilege!
(JJ)

EDitEDbyED:
Hooray!!!
I so glad someone else feels its not HiDef w/o HiDef sound.

Man & I've gone even crazier than that; I'm now addicted to LPCM soundtracks! =-I
(something I didn't EVEN care about at 1st, as I was OK w/lossless, now its uncompressed BABY!!!)

Re: I remember all this from '06! vvv

"Crazy" is definitely the correct term.

M.

Re: Warner Bros.: which titles "deserve" lossless audio?

M,
Have you heard the Stones in LPCM?!?!?!
:-0 :-0 :-0
:-) :-) :-)

Paint it Black, BABY!!!
;-)

Re: Warner Bros.: which titles "deserve" lossless audio?

An HD movie is not HD unless the audio is too. As simple as that for me.

Regardless of an individual's hearing ability...the common reason some use to say we don't really need it. Some people can't see too well either, but we don't have 480i "HD" video to accomodate them...

Keep the standards high and let people grow into them.

Re: Warner Bros.: which titles "deserve" lossless audio?

I don't actually remember which lossless format I selected on Shine a Light, and I don't care, because, you know, it's, like, lossless.

M.

Re: Warner Bros.: which titles "deserve" lossless audio?

Because then they can sell you another version in a year or two.....wait this
isn't Fox ,that is somethime I would expect from them, not warners,who
is the best of the studios even if they don't use Lossless right now
They don't sell you Blue Rays without extras (when the standard dvd has extras)
for forty dollars like Fox(or MGM),
Or drive you crazy with Trailors and that loding cramp Disney does

Maybe by the time Woodstock comes out it will have Lossless Audio
It they still owned their music I would love some Lossless Music Tiles
like the Doors,

Re: Warner Bros.: which titles "deserve" lossless audio?

OK :-(
Whatever... however... ;-)
The Stone's LPCM is stereo! :-)
So, not all lossless is lossless, as this is a different mix!
Enjoy.

Re: Warner Bros.: which titles "deserve" lossless audio?

Agreed. The technology is there, the disc space is there, so there is no reason as to why WB can't make a lossless soundtrack mandatory on EVERY title, other than the fact that they're penny pinchers and really have no clue how to run their HV dept.. All of the other major studios ( Fox / MGM, Disney / BV, Sony, Universal, Lionsgate ) include at least one lossless track on every title. I believe Paramount is now doing this as well, but I'm not sure. There really shouldn't have to be a deciding factor as to what title to give lossless audio, especially the success of a film in it's theatrical run.

This is the next gen format, an HD format for both video AND audio, and first and formost, the top priority of for each and every single title released, not only by WB, but every studio, should/needs to be presentation (video AND audio), with everything else like extras, a low priority.

For the most part, every studio, with the exception of WB, has their act together, as far as the treatment of their blu-ray titles, especially in the A/V dept. (with the exception of the DNR'd releases that have been popping up on occasion, like Patton). It's really a shame that WB doesn't take advantage of the BD format and continues to give us lossy audio on BD's, which happens more frequent than we get lossless audio. Yeah, the audio may be at a higher bitrate, but lossy is lossy.

Re: Warner Bros.: which titles "deserve" lossless audio?

all of them.
there is no legitimate reason for every singe release from now on out to not include lossless.

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

also the kitt kitridge blu-ray has a srp of $35. this is way higher then the usual for warner.
maybe because it includes another one of those digital copies.

Re: Warner Bros.: which titles "deserve" lossless audio?

Joe & Tony,
Is the disc space there on a BD25?
Thanks.

Re: Warner Bros.: which titles "deserve" lossless audio?

Some people will argue that most people can't hear the diff, their gear isn't good enough, something is already "good enough", yada yada... Let's eliminate most of the opinions and apologies and quality of gear or physical faculties.

This is the simple "principle": if a movie has sound, then it is not reproduced in HD until the sound is too.

If a movie has HD video only, then it is not an HD movie. If it has HD sound only, then it is not an HD movie.

Is that simple enough?

Since when is the audio not part of a "talkie" movie? So I say to WB: please start putting HD MOVIES on all your BDs.

Re: Warner Bros.: which titles "deserve" lossless audio?

Give it a rest, Tony. I edited the thread title.

Titles can only be edited by moderators. If you have a beef with a moderator action, take it up in private.

M.

Re: Warner Bros.: which titles "deserve" lossless audio?

The MSRP is $35 because that title was a theatrical release in June and July. That's no different than what studios have been pricing other newly released films that came out on BR within a year of their theatrical release. Actually, the MRSP of such titles had been $39.99 so it's a little cheaper in that regard.

Re: Warner Bros.: which titles "deserve" lossless audio?

Here, here!!!

Re: Warner Bros.: which titles "deserve" lossless audio?

Is it? ok i thought for some reason the srp has been around 29.99.

Re: Warner Bros.: which titles "deserve" lossless audio?

They are for most catalog titles.

At times, Warner for instance confuses me with MRSP on a title like Beetlejuice.

http://www.amazon.com/Beetlejuice-20...0664727&sr=1-2

Yet price a catalog title like L.A. Confidential at $28.99

http://www.amazon.com/L-Confidential...0665029&sr=1-2

Re: Warner Bros.: which titles "deserve" lossless audio?

If they need to charge more to include lossless, then so be it. But every title should have a lossless track.

Re: Warner Bros.: which titles "deserve" lossless audio?

How much more is it for a lossless track over a lossy track?
Thanks.

Re: Warner Bros.: which titles "deserve" lossless audio?

^Can't be much. Some of the IMO lousiest and cheapest BDs out there have lossless. They're not from WB of course. I guess what rubs more is when it's known the lossless track already exists because it was used on a WB HD-DVD. I suspect there are "unknown circumstances" behind the use of lossy audio in these few cases, because I don't consider WB a "cheap" studio.

Re: Warner Bros.: which titles "deserve" lossless audio?

It doesn't cost any more in licensing fees to add a TrueHD soundtrack if you're already including Dolby Digital, and the additional engineer time is negligible. It's more a matter of priorities (i.e. supplemental extras vs. lossless audio/bit budget vs. BD50 cost vs. expected sales).

Adam

Re: Warner Bros.: which titles "deserve" lossless audio?

While this is quite true, probably 95% of people can have their eye sight corrected to 20/20. Hearing however cannot be corrected to hear the subtleties of the differences between a lossless track and a very high bitrate lossy track.

Having said that I see no reason why a BD50 shouldn't have a lossless audio track on it.

Doug

Re: Warner Bros.: which titles "deserve" lossless audio?

I guess this depends on what you mean by HD sound. Some would not consider CD quality sound 16bit 44khz to be HD, yet this is the quality of sound that most film soundtracks are made up of. Most sound effects libraries are recorded at and delivered on CD quality. Some sound effects still in use to day were recorded in the 1930s.

I understand the desire to have the highest quality reproduction possible, but when we are saying HD sound I'm not real sure what that means. Does that mean a True HD track at 24/96 that is simply reproducing CD quality, or worse, audio? Or is CD quality good enough to be considered "HD"?

Doug

Re: Warner Bros.: which titles "deserve" lossless audio?

"Not all lossless is lossless"?

OK, Ed, whatever you say.

The relevant part of that quote is "yada yada", since no one's really making those arguments here. They're just the usual strawmen that are routinely brought out in these threads.

As a general proposition, no one seriously disputes that lossless is preferable. The argument always comes when a disc arrives without lossless, and not everyone is willing to agree that the studio issuing it should be tarred and feathered.

M.

Re: Warner Bros.: which titles "deserve" lossless audio?

^ Yeah, I'm not into the tarring and feathering. Perhaps when I was younger... Now I just don't buy, and move on.

Re: Warner Bros.: which titles "deserve" lossless audio?

i thought speed racer was the best movie of 2008, but i'm in the small minority =P. i have 100+ BD's and own several WB's without lossless.

yesh i agree lossless should be on every release BUT only if they remastered the soundtrack. lossless audio, just like 1080p24 video, are all useless unless the original film negative/masters are remastered. some older films, like those westerns, sound more/less the same with or without lossless. it can sound a tiny bit better... but u can't tell the diff. another example is the kubrick movies. i got them all on BD, lossless vs. lossy are practically speaking the same. but if they were remastered @the source level, i'm sure they would have sounded better either lossy or lossless with lossless giving u the most details.

specific titles other than speed racer:
-happy feet. i actually bought both superman returns and happy feet on BD ASSUMING truehd was ported from the HD DVD version. i was WRONG! i sold them both immediately. now that superman returns is receiving its lossless, i'm re-buying that one with the lossless. so hopefully happy feet gets its due.
-corpse bride. similar to nightmare before christmas but with NEW soundtrack, this musical should TOTALLY be lossless.