Jump to content



Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.


Photo
- - - - -

WB Blue Ray Have PCM 5.1 HD have Truehd


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
10 replies to this topic

#1 of 11 OFFLINE   Peter Neski

Peter Neski

    Supporting Actor



  • 909 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 14 2005

Posted October 27 2007 - 10:28 AM

which is better,why? does PCM 5.1 take more space? Is this a Problem? Warners is clearly the Best HD Studio with the Best Titles,and best prices for both HD and Blue Ray,why would they make the Wild Bunch have DD+ on the HD Version,and not on the Blue Ray

#2 of 11 OFFLINE   Dan Hitchman

Dan Hitchman

    Screenwriter



  • 2,714 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 11 1999

Posted October 27 2007 - 11:04 AM

WB is inconsistant as an HD studio. Their lossless and PCM tracks are both only 16 bit resolution... when they put either on their releases. Overseas WB will sometimes come through with 24 bit master lossless or PCM tracks. As to their video transfers they recycle the same HD-DVD optimized video encode for their Blu-ray releases sometimes letting the VC-1 video bitrate drop extremely low. It could be why sometimes the video seems a bit soft or artifact prone. Blu-ray has a larger bit budget for audio and video, so that is an advantage in my book. PCM is uncompressed audio and takes up more space. Dolby TrueHD (without Dial Norm engaged) is a packed or "zipped" version of the PCM track that takes up about 40-50% less space in compressed form. DTS-MA is also lossless compression, but is slightly less of a bit rate hog than Dolby TrueHD though it takes more horsepower to decode. A 24 bit lossless track is superior to a 16 bit PCM track, and takes up approximately the same amount of space. Dan

#3 of 11 OFFLINE   Craig_Ehr

Craig_Ehr

    Second Unit



  • 329 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 15 2002

Posted October 27 2007 - 11:13 AM

DD+ is mandated in the HD DVD spec I believe, while it is not on BD. You will find in nearly, if not all, cases the WB DD/DD+ audio tracks are identical. The more important concern is bitrate, and in general WB DD/DD+ tracks are encoded @ 640kbps (though DD+ tracks can have higher bitrates).

#4 of 11 OFFLINE   Adam Barratt

Adam Barratt

    Screenwriter



  • 2,344 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 16 1998

Posted October 27 2007 - 04:48 PM

Dolby Digital Plus support isn't mandatory on Blu-ray players, while Dolby Digital is. Using Dolby Digital ensures full playback support on all existing hardware. Creating one 640kbps soundtrack also means that Warner save on production costs. If they used a higher Dolby Digital Plus bit-rate for a 5.1-channel soundtrack, it would sound great on HD DVD but wouldn't be supported on Blu-ray. Whenever Warner has used a lossless or uncompressed format on both HD DVD and Blu-ray, they have both been of exactly the same fidelity (eg., 16-bit/48kHz for 300 and The Departed and 24-bit/48kHz for 2001: A Space Odyssey, Eyes Wide Shut). Adam

#5 of 11 OFFLINE   Jeff Adkins

Jeff Adkins

    Screenwriter



  • 1,765 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 18 1998
  • Real Name:Jeff Adkins

Posted October 28 2007 - 02:23 AM

Both tracks are identical. Roger Dressler from Dolby confirmed that the data is the same but they are packed differently. The only difference on Warner's PCM tracks vs. the TrueHD tracks is that the TrueHD tracks have post-processing to add dialogue normalization. There has been many heated debates as to whether that is an issue or not. You can do some searches here and read some of those old threads if you want to investigate it further. My only gripe with it is that Dolby refuses to allow it to be defeated on consumer receivers for those who don't want it. I'm not sure I care one way or the other, but I think consumers should be given the option of disabling it. DN aside, PCM tracks and TrueHD should sound identical.

#6 of 11 OFFLINE   Peter Neski

Peter Neski

    Supporting Actor



  • 909 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 14 2005

Posted October 28 2007 - 04:48 AM

Thanks I think I finally get it,so the sound on 2001 Blue Ray is hte same as the HD Version?

#7 of 11 OFFLINE   Dan Hitchman

Dan Hitchman

    Screenwriter



  • 2,714 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 11 1999

Posted October 28 2007 - 05:28 AM

In a rare first for WB in the U.S. the Blu-ray PCM track is 24 bit/48 kHz resolution (supposedly the same for all the Kubrick classics). I don't know if the TrueHD track on the HD-DVD side is 24 bit or 16 bit due to HD-DVD's lower bit budget and the fact that the Blu-ray's are 50 GB vs. HD-DVD's 30 GB's. Dan

#8 of 11 OFFLINE   Jeff Adkins

Jeff Adkins

    Screenwriter



  • 1,765 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 18 1998
  • Real Name:Jeff Adkins

Posted October 28 2007 - 05:33 AM

I don't know about the HD-DVD but the BD is definitely 16-bit.

#9 of 11 OFFLINE   Dan Hitchman

Dan Hitchman

    Screenwriter



  • 2,714 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 11 1999

Posted October 28 2007 - 05:38 AM

Damn! WB strikes again. I guess the specs. I read were wrong. If the European arm of WB can give us 24 bit PCM, why can't the U.S.??

#10 of 11 OFFLINE   Jeff Adkins

Jeff Adkins

    Screenwriter



  • 1,765 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 18 1998
  • Real Name:Jeff Adkins

Posted October 28 2007 - 10:27 AM

Good question. The review I read said it was 24-bit but the PS3 is showing it as 16-bit. Considering this is WB we're talking about, I'm just happy they gave us lossless at all.

#11 of 11 OFFLINE   John Stockton

John Stockton

    Second Unit



  • 366 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 09 2000

Posted October 29 2007 - 03:45 PM

Hidef digest also lists it as being 24 bit.

http://bluray.highde....ceodyssey.html




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users