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

[Dave_P.]

Who said the Sopranos are BD50's? Regardless the BD set has uncompressed PCM 5.1 audio, while the HD-DVD...doesn't.

 

[RobertR]

But if studio politics trump technical considerations, as they appear to be doing so far, that has the effect of watering down the technical advantage.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

That fact that studios routinely didn't use dual-layer DVDs or remaster in 16x9 early on in DVD's infancy had no bearing whatsover in the manner in which those same studios released product 1-2 years after the format had started to mature.

It should be obvious to anyone that no one can judge the manner in which studios will release any format until it's had a chance to mature. Even more confusing is why so many folks need to be reminded of this. I'm amazed at how a handful of titles and just a couple of months into launch and folks seem ready to evaluate mastering practices as though what we see now has any bearing about what we'll have within 1-2 years. Can you imagine how wrong we would have been about DVD had we done the same thing? In fact, many *did* do the same thing and were... well... completely wrong about how DVD ultimately was maximized by the studios.

 

[Rachael B]

Shouldn't this thread now have a new wrinkle in it now that Disney is doing a couple of BD's in VC1....Casanova and I'm fur-gettin' the other one. If they switch to VC1 will they really need to do all BD-50's? Surely not, unless they're planning to load up every release with mega extras...??? Who knows if they'll even stay with VC1 anyway....?

 

[DaViD Boulet]

And they used AVC for 8 below. Seems that they're experiementing with variuos codecs. I'm sure the mouse has *big* plans for 50 gig special-features once they really get rolling...

 

[MarekM]

Rachel, I think they will need it, evem wotj VC-1, if you add bonuses from any 2disk special edition, plus uncompressed PCM (or they can do DolbyTrueHD or DTS HD MASTER), you will be SURE over 25GB.....

just imagine mega packed TOY STORY with uncompressed PCM

Marek

 

[Douglas Monce]

You guys do realize that lossless does not mean uncompressed? All lossless means is that I can open a lossless format file, make changes to it, and save it again and the quality will be unchanged. With a lossy compression if I open that format file and make a change, and then save it, there is a degrading of the quality of the over all file.

The point being that if you convert a track to standard Dolby Digital, and Dolby Digital true HD, and they are both converted at the same bit rate, they will sound exactly the same. That is until you open the files and make changes too them. Which is irrelevant because no one WORKS on a sound track in the Dolby or DTS, its all done either analog or in PCM format on Protools. Once the tracks are mixed THEN they are transferred to some delivery method like Dolby or DTS. The delivery format is then unchanged all the way to the disk be it DVD or some HD format.

Now of course DD True HD and DTS-HD can deliver much higher bitrates than standard DD or DTS so that is significant. But frankly unless you are actually WORKING with these format (IE mixing the sound or editing the sound) lossless doesn't really mean a whole lot.

Doug

 

[MarekM]

Of course Dougles but so far no DolbyTrueHD or DTS HD MASTER lossless tracks on Disney releases.... that's why I pointed out uncompressed PCM track

few points :

- why anybody will put same bitrate on DD and DolbyTrueHD ??? DolbyTrueHD is lossless COMPRESSION, that's the only REASON to use it..... not to make same bitrate as DD to compress it with loss of data..., so NO THEY WILL NOT SOUND SAME !

DolbyTrueHD - is like ZIP commpresion, DD is like JPEG- you are going to loose some data..

- mixing is on UNCOMPRESSED DATA in aiff or wave form, in protools or any other professional sound mixing program....and uncompressed outut you have PCM in 16/24 bits..., then you can do DD, DTS,DD+,DolbyTrueHD or DTS HD MASTER..........

Dougles, by opening LOSSY compressed file you are not LOOSING anything... you already lost data but makign that compressed file...


Marek

 

[Douglas Monce]

Marek,

No your right by opening it your not loosing anything, but if you make a change to that file and then resave it, you ARE losing something. The only reason I bring this up is because a lot of people are throwing the lossless term around and I'm not sure they everyone really understands what it means.

But frankly even at the max bitrate of standard Dolby Digital there is so little lost that it’s hardly worth talking about. Now if we are talking about replicating the theatrical experience, then even DD+ is actually going to give you better than what you can hear at the theater.

I contend that 90% of people have nether the ears, the audio equipment or the room acoustics to be able to tell the difference between even a standard Dolby Digital soundtrack and the original masters. I suspect that most people think that DD True HD and DTS-HD are just louder.

I can hear some difference is the True HD track and the DD+ track on Batman Begins. Mostly some openness in the quieter parts of the movie. I honestly don't hear that much difference in the bombastic action scenes of the movie.

As for True HD Score only tracks that would be cool for modern movies, but kinda over kill for a John Williams score from the 70s.

Doug

 

[Ed St. Clair]

BD promised more space (40%) than HD DVD.
If both waring formats are releasing multidisc sets w/the same number of discs... there is no space benefit to BD.

"Regardless the BD set has uncompressed PCM 5.1 audio, while the HD-DVD...doesn't."
Now that "is" something to crow about!
Thanks.

 

[Ed St. Clair]

What a minute! The BIG BIG DEAL about BD was "more space! more space!".
Now BD "superior" space doesn't mean anything? Doesn't matter? Isn't used?
What's up w/that?
(Really can't believe you said that DaViD, as it is disparaging to all of your previous statements on BD storage advantage.)
It's a joke! A very bad "joke" on all consumers. We have 40% more space than the competition, butt we're not going to use it, cause we want to rip you off w/a future release!
Sicking.

HD Disc releases, from both waring sides, that don't have the features of the SD DVD release, are a failure. HD Disc was supposed to be "BIGGER & BETTER" not more expensive & less. :-0

I'll bet The Mouse, stuffs the living daylights out of BD 50's!!!
A least 'someone' knows how to sell classic/catalog titles $$$

 

[MarekM]

Well Ed, I blame studios not USING every bit of BD50

Marek

 

[MarekM]

I WILL K... for any John Williams score in DolbyTrueHD or DTS HD MASTER
I am SURE it is NOT OVERKILL, I wonder why do you think that is is overkill hmm

Marek

 

[Ed St. Clair]

That's a sane way to look at it! ;-)
Thanks.
However...
I'm "insane" about it! %^@

It goes back to the format war for me.
BD is "better" cause its BIGGER!
Butt it ends up BD could be a gazillion times BIGGER than HD DVD.
No matter, the studio will only get us enough content to re-buy the title.
:-(
Wonder if the gamers are in the same boat?

 

[ChristopherDAC]

Er, I think you are in error here. A "losslessly compressed" format is one which, when decompressed, produces a bit-for-bit replica of the PCM recording from which it was created. Obviously, it requires a much higher bitrate than the standard "lossy" compressed formats, which produce, when decoded, only an approximation to the original recording — although, often, a decent-sounding approximation. Lossless packing is just that : there is no loss going from PCM to packed form and back to PCM. There wouldn't be any use in it otherwise. The general assumption is that the result will have a higher audio quality than a lossy-compressed recording, as it will for all intents and purposes BE the original master recording, just as what comes out of a CD player is for all intents and purposes the same as what's on — well, the 3/4" PCM-F1 tape if you're using that, I guess, or else DAT or master burned CD if that's what you sent to the replicator. Of course, a lot of recordings today aren't done at 16/44.1, but that's another story.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Lossless does mean a whole lot! It's giving you actual "bit for bit" LPCM data identical to the LPCM stream fed into the encoder. No lossy compression can say the same. This is why Lossless (and linear PCM) almost always sound better than even the best lossy compression... no psycho-acoustic model of human hearing for an algorithm to decide what music it can throw away ever has to come into the picture. You just get the real, actual, original LPCM data bit-for-bit the same.

 

[PeterTHX]

I weep for the education system of this country...(folks in other countries where English is not the primary language are excused, those who were born and raised in the USA only speaking English are NOT!)

LOSE. LOSE. LOSE. LOSE. Ell, Oh, Ess, Eee.

(sorry, I'm starting to see this in internet articles, "Nero Burning ROM" options, and a PRINT AD for Vanns!)

 

[PeterTHX]

Hopefully it doesn't mean 20% more banding ("Superman Returns")

 

[Douglas Monce]

David,

You've probably got something there particularly with psycho-acoustic modeling. However I still contend that most people can not hear the difference even if they have audio equipment good enough to actually reproduce the difference.

Doug

 

[Douglas Monce]

Sorry Peter, I'm dyslexic and often times can see the difference between lose and loose.

Doug