-

Jump to content



Photo
- - - - -

Why I think BluRay may be the future for CD-based music and HD video content...


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
261 replies to this topic

#41 of 262 OFFLINE   Lee Scoggins

Lee Scoggins

    Producer

  • 6,396 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 30 2001
  • Real Name:Lee

Posted March 17 2004 - 08:28 AM

Quote:
It's not about mpeg2 being worse than the other codecs, it's about efficiency. If mpeg4 looks as good at 10mb/s as mpeg2 does at 28mb/s, why use mpeg2?


Here's the thing. Since BluRay holds 50GB of data isn't that enough to hold a hi-def MPEG2 movie at very, very high quality? Isn't bandwidth only an issue on digital delivery systems like cable, etc?

Quote:
Sorry Lee.. I don't have any of those links.


My mistake, I thought John Kotches said you provided some links...somebody did put when I linked over the test was like WM9 versus standard DVD which is not an answer to the discussion.

Quote:
Stacey Spears has encoded WM9 test material for Joe Kane. I'm sure he has some insight.


Well I will look for her comments. Stacey, you out there?

Again, it may not be the best technology that wins, Beta was better than VHS in several respects.

Quote:
At this point, there is no provision for Hi-Res Audio+Video on a single stream for Blu-Ray.


According to Sony, they have envisioned using DSD data streams since early days of development so at least we are good on Super Audio. Seems we could have both DSD and DVDA included in the final spec so universal players are possible.
Viewing: Sony KDSXBR150, Sony Bluray S570, ATT Uverse
Listening: Sony SCD777ES, Benchmark DAC1Pre, VPI/Modwright SWP9SE/Lyra Argo, Audio Research Ref3/VT100, Maggie 1.7s

 


#42 of 262 OFFLINE   Michael St. Clair

Michael St. Clair

    Producer

  • 6,009 posts
  • Join Date: May 03 1999

Posted March 17 2004 - 08:39 AM

Quote:
Well I will look for her comments. Stacey, you out there?


Um, Stacey is a man. And I'm not sure if he hangs out here.

#43 of 262 OFFLINE   Jesper

Jesper

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 191 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 17 1999
  • Real Name:Jesper Nielsen
  • LocationDenmark

Posted March 17 2004 - 08:50 AM

WSR has a story (link) about PIXAR might join Warner; if that's true and Warner is voting for HD-DVD.. then I think HD-DVD has another advantage.. Posted Image
Jesper Nielsen

#44 of 262 OFFLINE   John Kotches

John Kotches

    Screenwriter

  • 2,636 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 14 2000

Posted March 17 2004 - 10:06 AM

Lee says:

Quote:
Here's the thing. Since BluRay holds 50GB of data isn't that enough to hold a hi-def MPEG2 movie at very, very high quality? Isn't bandwidth only an issue on digital delivery systems like cable, etc?

In response to the first question, why do I want to settle for very high quality when better than that is available? The answer is simple, I don't.

In response to the second question, bandwidth is always an issue. I'm wondering if you've done the calculations. That's 50 base 10 GBs, and all my calculations are done based on that factor. You have 400 billion bits available for storage.

Your maximum data rate is 36 million bits/second. At 3 hours and 5 minutes, you're out of space on the 50GB disc. You can't store any of the extended versions of Lord of the Rings on this.

So, let's back it down to 24 million bits/second. This is the same as D-VHS, which is "very very good" quality. Clearly this is an improvement over HDTV, which is a nice starting point. This gives us about 4.5 hours of storage time, which is good. I've read, but have not confirmed that Blu-Ray is limited to 24 Megabits/second for video.

On the other hand, we have HD-DVD, which is limited to about 20 Megabits/second. At first glance, this seems like a tremendous disadvantage. True, if MPEG-2 encoding is used. However, HD-DVD has "mandatory" codecs of MPEG-2, MPEG-4/H.264 and WM-9/VC-9. It could be that either or both of the advanced codecs get pulled from the spec based on what the licensing costs will be. Mandatory in this sense means that players must support all these codecs, and that content providers must use one of these codecs.

Everything I've read, and everyone I've talked to about the topic indicate that both of the latter codecs have better performance than MPEG-2. Stacey is one, but he's biased, since he works for Microsoft.

Perry Sun has seen the demos, he too has indicated in WSR that WM-9 had demonstrably better performance. I don't know if he's seen MPEG-4 vs. MPEG-2.

I have not seen both on the same material, so I can't comment personally on head to head comparisons. I have seen WM-9 material, and the one thing I remember most was the lack of mosquito noise. I find mosquito noise quite distracting.

So to me, the backwards compability is addressed by HD-DVDs inclusion of MPEG-2 as a "mandatory" codec.

Then there's the manufacturing infrastructure for media, and clearly HD-DVD has the edge here since it can use the existing DVD infrastructure where Blu-Ray cannot.

As I said before, if Blu-Ray had the wisdom to choose one (or both) of the more advanced codecs then I would be supporting it as opposed to HD-DVD. But they didn't.

Cheers,
Surround Music Enthusiast / Curmudgeon in Training
Opinions are my own, not representative of the publication I write for.

#45 of 262 OFFLINE   Lee Scoggins

Lee Scoggins

    Producer

  • 6,396 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 30 2001
  • Real Name:Lee

Posted March 17 2004 - 11:48 AM

Quote:
Perry Sun has seen the demos, he too has indicated in WSR that WM-9 had demonstrably better performance. I don't know if he's seen MPEG-4 vs. MPEG-2.


But do we know it was a fair test? Who sponsored it?

So it seems you are saying that you don't know for sure that MPEG4 is an improvement over MPEG2 at high-def resolutions since you have not seen the test.

This still supports my view that MPEG2 could still present a great picture at high resolution.

Why can't that be "good enough" in video as many here claim that redbook is "good enough" for the public?

It seems a major contradiction to say that redbook is fine but high-def MPEG2 is not.

Believe me that if BluRay manages to continue to have the lead, then even a possibly (?) better MPEG4 (which I still have not seen conclusive proof even after surfing the AVS Forum for an hour) may lose just since the majors involved have chosen BluRay.

It also appears that BluRay may have a big advantage in data storage launch based on my ZD Net reading. It may prove easier to "extend" the brand as the BluRay players come out later this year.

I am just searching for answers, but I think there is logic to my original post--there are some very big companies lined up behind BluRay. As a consumer I want the best but after the hirez music experience I see great value in promoting one standard and NOT having another format war that confuses the customer thereby slowing adoption.

I would like to learn more about the video codecs. If anyone works in the industry and has some good links, please provide them for the forum. Thanks! Posted Image
Viewing: Sony KDSXBR150, Sony Bluray S570, ATT Uverse
Listening: Sony SCD777ES, Benchmark DAC1Pre, VPI/Modwright SWP9SE/Lyra Argo, Audio Research Ref3/VT100, Maggie 1.7s

 


#46 of 262 OFFLINE   Michael St. Clair

Michael St. Clair

    Producer

  • 6,009 posts
  • Join Date: May 03 1999

Posted March 17 2004 - 01:15 PM

If Blu-Ray is superior to HD-DVD, Sony would fund some tests to demonstrate it, then rub the rest of the industry's collective noses in it.

Video quality is far less subjective to compare than audio quality. Consecutive screenshots of demanding material, compared to the original source, reveal the answer with no need for the blind tests that are needed for meaningful audio comparisons.

I predict that objective tests will surface, and MPEG-2 at D-Theater/Blu-Ray (identical) bitrates will lose handily.

#47 of 262 OFFLINE   Lee Scoggins

Lee Scoggins

    Producer

  • 6,396 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 30 2001
  • Real Name:Lee

Posted March 17 2004 - 11:57 PM

Quote:
If Blu-Ray is superior to HD-DVD, Sony would fund some tests to demonstrate it


Uh, they already have done so. They demonstrated the BluRay transfers to several major studio execs and their response was very positive according to The Wall Street Journal.

It seems logical that a new generation video codec would outperform an older one, but there are two problems here...

1. Most of the major CE and PC firms have already aligned behind BluRay. Why would they do that if the technology was not good enough?

2. No one can point to any screen shots or technical background that shows a reasonable comparison between the two formats. Not even the MP4 web site has anything I could find.
Viewing: Sony KDSXBR150, Sony Bluray S570, ATT Uverse
Listening: Sony SCD777ES, Benchmark DAC1Pre, VPI/Modwright SWP9SE/Lyra Argo, Audio Research Ref3/VT100, Maggie 1.7s

 


#48 of 262 OFFLINE   Justin Lane

Justin Lane

    Screenwriter

  • 2,149 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 18 2000

Posted March 18 2004 - 02:25 AM

Quote:
Most of the major CE and PC firms have already aligned behind BluRay. Why would they do that if the technology was not good enough?


We all know better technology does not always win out in subjects like this. You yourself have mentioned Beta vs. VHS. There is your answer.

I remain very skeptical about any firms being aligned with a technology until it actually makes it to market. Until then it is nothing more than marketing hyperbole and vaporware.

J

#49 of 262 OFFLINE   John Kotches

John Kotches

    Screenwriter

  • 2,636 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 14 2000

Posted March 18 2004 - 02:50 AM

Lee asks:

Quote:
But do we know it was a fair test? Who sponsored it?

I have to look through the issue, it was probably a demonstration of VC-9 to the public by Microsoft. I'll ask Perry for the details, or look it up, so don't expect an immediate answer.


Quote:
So it seems you are saying that you don't know for sure that MPEG4 is an improvement over MPEG2 at high-def resolutions since you have not seen the test.

People that I know and respect for their expertise on the subject including the aforementioned Stacey Spears, Greg Rogers and John Gannon have all said that MPEG-4 is better than MPEG-2. All of them have a level of expertise that goes way beyond mine.

Quote:
This still supports my view that MPEG2 could still present a great picture at high resolution.

Why can't that be "good enough" in video as many here claim that redbook is "good enough" for the public?

As I said, I don't want "good enough" or "very good" when better is available. This is supposed to be a next generation technology and as such should offer improvements beyond bandwidth and storage capacity. Sticking with MPEG-2 as the only codec is a bad choice. If the Blu-Ray committee showed wisdom, they would have allowed for more than MPEG-2. Had they done this, as I said before, we wouldn't even be having this discussion.

In another post you said:
Quote:
Most of the major CE and PC firms have already aligned behind BluRay. Why would they do that if the technology was not good enough?

Data storage is a seperate issue from A/V capability. No one will even argue with you about Blu-Ray being a superior solution for raw data. When you start talking about video encoding/decoding algorithms you are dealing in the arena of very high, lossy compression. Once you start talking in those realms, storage capacity and off the spindle bandwidth take a back seat to image quality through the encode/decode chain.

In this case, then 20 Mbits/second (max) could well trump 36Mbits/second (max).

Cheers,
Surround Music Enthusiast / Curmudgeon in Training
Opinions are my own, not representative of the publication I write for.

#50 of 262 OFFLINE   Rachael B

Rachael B

    Producer

  • 4,637 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 05 2000

Posted March 18 2004 - 04:06 AM

....umn, Sony, So-ny, hmnn, wern't those the guyz who wanted to release CD's at 12 bits, oui! Mr. Philips talked 'dem's outta' that.Posted Image
Rachael, the big disc cat is in real life Dot Mongur, Champion of the International Pacman Federation. You better be ready to rumble if you play Jr. Pacman with me. This is full contact Pacman and I don't just play the game, I operate it!


#51 of 262 OFFLINE   LanceJ

LanceJ

    Producer

  • 3,168 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 26 2002

Posted March 18 2004 - 05:22 AM

John K: are you saying HDTV quality--the HDTV we have right now--is only a starting point?? Such images are amazingly realistic and nearly three dimensional. Gee, how much better do they need to be to allow a person to "properly" enjoy a good movie?

Posted Image

LJ

#52 of 262 OFFLINE   John Kotches

John Kotches

    Screenwriter

  • 2,636 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 14 2000

Posted March 18 2004 - 05:44 AM

Lance,

Have you ever seen a well done D-VHS, like Entrapment or Standing in the Shadows of Motown? If you have, you'll understand my point Posted Image

To my eyes, D-VHS is a noticable improvement over HDTV, and I would like to see the same gain (above and beyond D-VHS) from the next generation of pre-recorded media. Since it is technically possible through the utilization of more up to date codecs such as MPEG-4/H.264 and WM9/VC-9 I want that Posted Image Yes, it's selfish but I'm not too worried about that at this point Posted Image

Cheers,
Surround Music Enthusiast / Curmudgeon in Training
Opinions are my own, not representative of the publication I write for.

#53 of 262 OFFLINE   Lee Scoggins

Lee Scoggins

    Producer

  • 6,396 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 30 2001
  • Real Name:Lee

Posted March 18 2004 - 06:09 AM

Quote:
We all know better technology does not always win out in subjects like this. You yourself have mentioned Beta vs. VHS. There is your answer.


This was the point of my original post. Posted Image

Quote:
I have to look through the issue, it was probably a demonstration of VC-9 to the public by Microsoft.


Clearly Microsoft is an interested (biased) party here.

Quote:
People that I know and respect for their expertise on the subject including the aforementioned Stacey Spears, Greg Rogers and John Gannon have all said that MPEG-4 is better than MPEG-2.


I tend to believe MP4 is better if Greg Rogers says it is. I know him to be a reliable source. Still, it does not mean that MPEG2 does not look amazing in high-def as well. Posted Image

Quote:
As I said, I don't want "good enough" or "very good" when better is available.


Me too, but you should not say then that Super Audio and DVDA won't fly because redbook is "good enough" for the masses.

Quote:
Gee, how much better do they need to be to allow a person to "properly" enjoy a good movie?


Yes, good point Lance and MPEG2 achieves that. Posted Image

Quote:
D-VHS is a noticable improvement over HDTV


D-VHS looks great - my local hifi shop has Xmen in that format and it is awesome. But clearly we have moved beyond tape-based formats. Posted Image
Viewing: Sony KDSXBR150, Sony Bluray S570, ATT Uverse
Listening: Sony SCD777ES, Benchmark DAC1Pre, VPI/Modwright SWP9SE/Lyra Argo, Audio Research Ref3/VT100, Maggie 1.7s

 


#54 of 262 OFFLINE   John Kotches

John Kotches

    Screenwriter

  • 2,636 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 14 2000

Posted March 18 2004 - 07:22 AM

Lee says:

Quote:
Clearly Microsoft is an interested (biased) party here.

So? That doesn't change the facts that the codec is demonstrably better than MPEG-2.

Never mind your mention of the Sony demo is somewhat biased as well.

Quote:
Me too, but you should not say then that Super Audio and DVDA won't fly because redbook is "good enough" for the masses.

Products on the market can't compare with products not yet on the market. Since HDTV sales are exploding, the timing of either of these HD capable formats could be perfect.

With video, one can demonstrate handily (and repeatedly) the gains from the format.

Quote:
D-VHS looks great - my local hifi shop has Xmen in that format and it is awesome. But clearly we have moved beyond tape-based formats

And clearly you missed my point that D-VHS is what consider the current reference for picture quality. This is what I want better quality than. It is acheivable, with the right choices being made.

Cheers,
Surround Music Enthusiast / Curmudgeon in Training
Opinions are my own, not representative of the publication I write for.

#55 of 262 OFFLINE   Rachael B

Rachael B

    Producer

  • 4,637 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 05 2000

Posted March 18 2004 - 09:23 AM

Lee, I haven't moved beyond tape-based formats. With D-VHS I can start recording quickly....no waiting for a disc to format. I think it's rather handy, familar, and easy to use thusly. MOULIN ROUGE is totally awesome on D-VHS. As good as X-MEN 2 is it's a notch below it. Someday may stille be a relatively long time off?
Rachael, the big disc cat is in real life Dot Mongur, Champion of the International Pacman Federation. You better be ready to rumble if you play Jr. Pacman with me. This is full contact Pacman and I don't just play the game, I operate it!


#56 of 262 OFFLINE   Lee Scoggins

Lee Scoggins

    Producer

  • 6,396 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 30 2001
  • Real Name:Lee

Posted March 18 2004 - 01:52 PM

I'm sorry Rachael but as good as the video seems, I think I will avoid any tape based format going forward. It doesn't seem like a good investment with BluRay/HD-DVD being around the corner.

Quote:
Products on the market can't compare with products not yet on the market. Since HDTV sales are exploding, the timing of either of these HD capable formats could be perfect.


The principles are still the same and BluRay is on the market in Japan.

Quote:
So? That doesn't change the facts that the codec is demonstrably better than MPEG-2.


Nobody has shown any real evidence here that the codec is better. How about some screen shots?
Viewing: Sony KDSXBR150, Sony Bluray S570, ATT Uverse
Listening: Sony SCD777ES, Benchmark DAC1Pre, VPI/Modwright SWP9SE/Lyra Argo, Audio Research Ref3/VT100, Maggie 1.7s

 


#57 of 262 OFFLINE   Michael St. Clair

Michael St. Clair

    Producer

  • 6,009 posts
  • Join Date: May 03 1999

Posted March 18 2004 - 03:05 PM

D-VHS will ultimately be succeeded by recordable disc (hopefully HD-DVD, Blu Ray needs to die).

It still serves a very important role. You can buy a refurb recorder for $300 or a new recorder for $500. Media is cheap. With this, you can losslessly record all of your broadcast HD today if you have an OTA, satellite, or cable box with firewire out.

Or you can wait until late 2006, and spend $1000 or more on a disc-based recorder. Disc media will probably cost a good deal more than blank tapes...I remember when blank CDs and DVDs were each more than $10 each.

Some people want/need to record their HD today, for cheap, not 2.5 years from now for expensive.

Of course, the majority of HDTV owners are casual enthusiasts and could care less if they have to wait two and a half years to record.

But D-VHS is a very important niche and should now be summarily dismissed. Those of us who had/have laserdisc understand the value of niche formats.

I can tell you this; if there is a format war for High-Def on disc, I'm not buying either format until the dust has settled and a victor has emerged.

#58 of 262 OFFLINE   Michael St. Clair

Michael St. Clair

    Producer

  • 6,009 posts
  • Join Date: May 03 1999

Posted March 18 2004 - 03:07 PM

Quote:
Nobody has shown any real evidence here that the codec is better. How about some screen shots?


You said you trust Greg Rogers. You've also made it pretty clear that you would prefer an inferior format as long as the big CE companies are behind it. I don't think you are going to find a lot of sympathy.

I've heard indirectly that Joe Kane feels MPEG2 is inferior. On the other hand, nobody other than the manufacturers (who are all about politics and royalties, not quality) has stood up for Blu-Ray. Not officially and not unofficially.

Why do you predict that Blu-Ray will be a high-res audio format? Only HD-DVD has shown any indication of catering to high-res audio.

#59 of 262 OFFLINE   Rachael B

Rachael B

    Producer

  • 4,637 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 05 2000

Posted March 18 2004 - 05:23 PM

Lee, The Nipponese got wide TV quite a bit before us. Right now there's proably a broader audience for the product there. That will change over time of course. I don't think the U.S. is ready for high-def disc recording just yet. All the enthusiasts on there boards might be, but we're a drop in the puddle. Right now D-VHS is handy and I can transfer it to something else sometime if I please. The 16 x 9 480i recordings I've made are impressive. I hope to do 1080i eventually. Look at how poorly D-VHS is doing. It's an indication that high-def is not quite ready to break out, IMO. Remember alot of folks take DVD as hi-def and just got their first DVD/VHS combi player and stille get NTSC cable or satelite. The tipping point isn't quite there yet, IMO. Sumtimes you forget we are the audio-vidiots ahead auf err tyhmes.Posted Image Posted Image
Rachael, the big disc cat is in real life Dot Mongur, Champion of the International Pacman Federation. You better be ready to rumble if you play Jr. Pacman with me. This is full contact Pacman and I don't just play the game, I operate it!


#60 of 262 OFFLINE   Lee Scoggins

Lee Scoggins

    Producer

  • 6,396 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 30 2001
  • Real Name:Lee

Posted March 19 2004 - 12:40 AM

Quote:
I can tell you this; if there is a format war for High-Def on disc, I'm not buying either format until the dust has settled and a victor has emerged.


I think that's a reasonable position.

Quote:
You said you trust Greg Rogers.


Yes, but I would like to see some evidence which no one has provided so far. If Joe Kane likes it then so much the better, but the proof is in the watching. Posted Image

Quote:
You've also made it pretty clear that you would prefer an inferior format as long as the big CE companies are behind it.


No I did not-please read my posts carefully. I said that (1) I prefer the best video possible and (2) BluRay group has enough market power to overcome technical advantages if they so choose. Read my original post, I am saying that so far BluRay has the market advantage not the technical one.

Quote:
Why do you predict that Blu-Ray will be a high-res audio format? Only HD-DVD has shown any indication of catering to high-res audio.


Two reasons: Sony had stated that DSD will be part of the spec and the extra capacity allows lots of music possibilities. I feel that if the CE and PC companies are smart they can improve their standing by a massive PR campaign that also creates more hirez music awareness. No doubt many people will still download music but making surround/extra detail of hirez known could make it much easier for people to buy a premium product.

Remember in my view of the world, Joe Sixpack is a mythical being. The US retail world is a market of niches and sub-niches.

Quote:
I don't think the U.S. is ready for high-def disc recording just yet.


Rachael, who cares if the rest of the US buys in immediately? I have seen hi-def and it is awesome in it's level of detail and blacks. By the way, HDTV ready flat panels are taking off like a rocket.

Do you realize you could have made the same statement about DVD in 1997?
Viewing: Sony KDSXBR150, Sony Bluray S570, ATT Uverse
Listening: Sony SCD777ES, Benchmark DAC1Pre, VPI/Modwright SWP9SE/Lyra Argo, Audio Research Ref3/VT100, Maggie 1.7s

 



Back to Music & Soundtracks



Forum Nav Content I Follow