WB poor choice in audio for Terminator 3 (1 Viewer)

[Cees Alons]

The other way around: they're probably trying not to upset the BR crowd.

On HD DVD Dolby Digital Plus is a mandatory codec (for the players), delivering a maximum bitrate of 3.0 Mbit/s (and up to 7.1 channels).

On Blu-ray, DD+ is not mandatory, and *might* be supported by the player to a maximum of 6.1 or 7.1 channels, with a total maximum bitrate of 1.7 Mbit/s.

Using the "maximum" possible bitrates for DD+ on both media would result in a lower rate on BR (and they wouldn't be sure even how it would be decoded in the individual players - or downmixed).
Not that this would prove beforehand that the track would be inferior to the ears, of course.


Cees

 

[Dave Moritz]

How can you be sure you haven't played a 640kb/sec DD track in your home theater yet? Does your player have a bit rate indicator that tells you every thing is at 448kb/sec? I own a 10+ year old Yamaha RX-V995 far from being high end. I also own a Sony DVP-S9000 ES that is at least 5 years old and it has a feature that will tell me the bit rate of the audio. And it also has a video bit rate bar that gives you a good idea where the video bit rate is from moment to moment.

As I mentioned above Pink Floyd Pulse has two Dolby Digital tracks, one is a 448kb/sec and the other is a 640kb/sec track. Both my Denon DVD-2200 and my Sony DVP-S9000 player the 640kb/sec track and the Sony confirms that it is handling a 640kb/sec DD track and the receiver does light up DD.

I would not be suprised that nearly 96% or more of the DVD's are at 448kb/sec, but there are discs out there with 640kb/sec. And the older decoders can play them and I am willing to bet any of the new decoders can as well.

Here are some DVD titles I check out with the bitrate meter on the Sony.
Pink Floyd Pluse - 640kb/sec Dolby Digital
Star Wars: Revenge Of The Sith - 448kb/sec Dolby Digital
Spiderman 2 (Superbit)- 448kb/sec DD - 754kb/sec DTS
The Recruit - 448kb/sec DD - 754kb/sec DTS
The Grudge - 448kb/sec Dolby Digital
Transformers - 448kb/sec Dolby Digital

I realize that DTS has nothing to do with our discusion but I am being thorough. Even if there is not many discs out there the current DVD format can handle 640kb/sec DD tracks and the decoders can play them. If you do not believe me place your copy of Pink Floyd Pulse and choose the 640kb option. If you do not own it I would encourage you to borrow it or pick it up on your next shopping trip. I bet you will find that your DD decoder will indeed play the 640kb track.

And as far as taking my 640kb/sec Pulse title on HD-DVD and trying to play the 640kb/sec DD+ track goes. Your right it can not be done because the DVD player will not read the HD-DVD disc. Now on HD-DVD Dolby Digital Plus does not include the extension core so even if one could burn the audio track to a DVD. There is no extension core for the Dolby Digital decoder to read. But it is different for Blu-ray, Dolby Digital Plus does have the extention and there for it could be read by a Dolby Digital decoder. So since DD+ is built on the DD core on the Blu-ray format, WB could have encoded T3 as DD+ for both HD formats. They could have easily encoded both discs at 1.5mb/sec and the only difference should be that anyone that does not have the ability to decode DD+ on Blu-ray. All they would get is the 640kb/sec core with the Dolby Digital decoder. And technically WB could have pushed the envelope and encoded both HD-DVD and Blu-ray at Blu-rays max DD+ limit of 1.7mb/sec. I feel we both agree that WB is not taking full advantage of DD+. IMHO the 640kb/sec Dolby Digital Plus track is not a major improvement over the 448kb/sec DVD. I have played both and hear almost no difference. The DD+ track for example on Bourne Supremacy is better than its DVD counterpart. How ever I greatly prefer Dolby True HD over DD+ and especially over DD. I still have not reason to buy T3 on Blu-ray with its 640 kb/sec DD track. Basically I ended up buying the HD-DVD version because at least it has a superior picture compaired to my SD-DVD.

Dolby Digital Plus
What it is: An enhancement over standard Dolby Digital, DD+ offers higher bit rates and more efficient compression, resulting in improved sound quality. It can also support movie soundtracks up to 7.1 discrete channels (though honestly, the vast majority of Hollywood movies are only mixed for 5.1). On Blu-ray, DD+ is encoded as an extension to a "core" Dolby Digital AC-3 track.

 

[Michael Reuben]

Because I have used Lexicon DD decoders (starting with a DC-1) since before there was any such thing as DVD, and they report the bitrate of every DD signal (along with other detailed information). And I almost always look, because I'm curious.

There's a reason that 640 track on your Pulse DVD is an alternate track. It's non-standard, and the disc's producers knew enough to include a standard track at 448kb/ps. If you can find any movie encoded at the 640 bitrate on a standard def DVD, please let me know. But I think you'll be looking for a long time.

M.

 

[Douglas Monce]

As someone who is involved in DVD production as part of my job I can tell you that we never encode DD above 448 kb because it presents a compatibility issue. While some decoders can handle it, most cannot. Its not unlike the fact that we don't allow the video bit rate to go above 10 mb because although some players can handle it, most will simply come to a halt when they get to that point.

As Michael Reuben points out the 640 kb Dolby Digital track is an alternate track on that particular disc, not unlike the fact that DTS is always an alternate because not all equipment can play it back.
Doug

 

[Grant H]

WB has always skimped on the audio. It took them forever to jump to 448 on DVD (I'm guessing they eventually did anyway).

As for BD being capable of a lower transfer rate than HD DVD for DD+, so far that's been moot since there aren't any DD+ BDs that I know of.

Some oldies exist with just DD or DTS, but most today have PCM or losslessly compressed tracks (some of which still boil down to DTS for a lot of us right now).

Would be nice if WB would be more consistent in offering their lossless tracks. Paramount was the other offender, but ....

Though many of us knew to expect PCM for Top Gun and the Jack Ryan collection before the about face.

 

[Ken_McAlinden]

...That's probably an overstatement. Since 1998, I have owned exactly one DVD player that was incapable of handling the 640 Kbps track on "Pulse", and that was my Pioneer DVL-909 laserdisc combo player. That was a second generation DVD-player that could not handle DTS either. While I do not doubt that there are a significant number of players that cannot handle 640 Kbps. I doubt it is a vast, or even a simple, majority.

In any case, hearing DD5.1 at 640 Kbps is what convinced me once and for all that it was a better codec than DTS. While some form of lossless audio would certainly be nice, 640 Kbps DD sounds awfully good to me.

Regards,

 

[Michael Reuben]

I didn't say "players", Ken. I said "equipment". The decoders are also an issue. As Doug Monce confirmed, there's a reason why DD at 640kb/ps was never more than an alternate track (and so far on only one disc that anyone's been able to name).

Know what though? I don't really care if it's a vast majority, a simple majority or a small but vocal minority. The point here, which it's important not to lose sight of, is that DD+ at 640kp/ps represents an increase in both bitrate and sonic quality over the DD that was offered on 99.99999999999999% of standard definition DVDs. So to say that Warner is offering us "the same thing" on hi-def as on standard def is to make oneself instantly dismissable. Not a good way to start if you want to lobby them to improve their audio presentation.

M.

 

[Harminder]

No it doesn't. I use to think the PLUS meant something, but it clearly doesn't with T3.

Had the BD version of T3 had a PCM or TrueHD track, I would have gladly double dipped on this movie.

 

[Douglas Monce]

Well to be fair, even at 640kp/ps, its a huge improvement over what was available on standard DVD, or even the theatrical presentation.

Doug

Edit: Sorry I forgot about the DTS track on the SD DVD, was it 640kp/ps? I don't know. Regardless DD+ is a more efficient codec and at 640 is probably an improvement on standard DTS at 640.

 

[Shane Martin]

The T3 disc in the US didn't have one so unless someone is talking about a non-R1 release, the DD track was 448.

 

[Douglas Monce]

You're right. I was thinking of the Terminator 2 Ultimate Edition.

Doug

 

[Dave Moritz]

It's nice that the DD+ track is 640k but I still feel the offering of DD on the Blu-ray version of T3 is weak and a poor choice. I say that because they could have offered higher bit DD+ at minimum. They also could have offered Dolby True HD, Uncompressed PCM or DTS-HD Master Audio. But they did not just like most of the WB HD titles out there. Most of them are low bit rate DD+ tracks. While yes there are a few DT-HD tracks that WB released on HD-DVD they also have DN. The only reason I am glad to own the HD-DVD version of T3 is because of the 1080p transfer.

So while the 640k DD may be considered to be better than 448k DD. I feel the title of the thread still stands, WB choice of DD track for a Blu-ray release of T3 is poor!

 

[Douglas Monce]

I think early on Warner's wasn't putting DD + or True HD on their blu-ray titles because of the lack of players able to decode these formats. Honestly at this point I don't know how many blu-ray players can now decode DD+ or true HD. I know mine can't.

Doug

 

[Michael Reuben]

Now that would be a poor choice for audio in the current hardware environment, as most owners of Fox discs with this as the lossless option can confirm.

M.

 

[Adam Barratt]

Michael, every external Dolby Digital decoder with an S/PDIF input must able to decode 640kbps Dolby Digital, as it is one of the decoder's requirements for certification. As Dolby state in their encoding guidelines:

"Decoders with an IEC 61937 (S/PDIF) input for Dolby Digital bitstreams must be able to accept data rates up to 640 kb/s, and sample rates of 48, 44.1, and 32 kHz, to allow for the possibility of new delivery formats. This requirement does not apply to ATSC-compliant DTV sets, which only need support data rates through 448 kb/s at the 48 kHz sample rate."

These standards don't apply to DVD-Video players, but while the format itself is 'technically' restricted to 448kbps, most players will happily output 640kbps Dolby Digital. Around eight years ago I had a DVD surround sampler that included a 'hidden' 640kbps version of the 1812 Overture, and I never had a problem playing it on any equipment available at the time.

Adam

 

[Michael Reuben]

I still have that sampler, and while my all my Lexicons could play it, I remember reports of early decoders that couldn't. Then again, I suppose it's not surprising to find problems with first-gen hardware, and I defer to higher authority.

As I said above, the important point remains that DD tracks on standard definition DVDs topped out at 448kb/ps, with the occasional exception of an alternate track like the Pulse DVD. Adam, would you agree that it's erroneous to assert that DD+ at 640kb/ps is "the same" as standard DD? That's the only point that really counts.

M.

 

[Adam Barratt]

Well, they're not the 'same', but the sound quality of both formats at that bit-rate should be identical for all intents and purposes. It's only at lower and higher bit-rates, or with additional channels, that Dolby Digital Plus really distinguishes itself from Dolby Digital. But then higher bit-rates wouldn't do much good for Terminator 3 as 1536kbps Dolby Digital Plus 5.1 on Blu-ray wouldn't offer much, if any, tangible sonic benefits over 640kbps Dolby Digital due to the way it's delivered.

Adam

 

[EnricoE]

i say: wait for the european release of t3. it will be a sony release and therefor on blu-ray including pcm and/or dolby true-hd.

 

[Michael Reuben]

Now I am curious. Please explain.

M.

 

[Jeff Cooper]

So after reading through all of this, it sounds like the HD DVD audio track and the Blu-Ray audio track for this release will be identical, correct? Both of them will be Dolby Digital 640kpbs (the '+' on the end of the HD DVD being just semantical.)

Is this the case?