Columbia to go completely Blu-ray by 2005 (from DavisDVD) (2 Viewers)

[Jason Harbaugh]

I agree, I think only one will be able to survive. DVHS is already the laserdisc of the 00's. We don't need another HD niche product. I want a fullscale, never need to buy dvd again, HD optical format.

The public has never liked multiple formats and when that is the case, none ever take off. Just look at the DVD recording formats. None really took off until, surprise, dual format recorders started becoming available. Now they have been selling like hotcakes. No one wants to be stuck with an expensive drive that has little support.

Also, was Blu-ray even submitted as a format to the DVD-Forum? I recall that it wasn't but I am not sure.

 

[Grant H]

"Whew!" Thought this was going to turn into another DD vs DTS thread for a minute.

Just remember, kids. They BOTH suck compared to what we could have on a next-gen format.

I've just got to say that I'm amazed DVD took off like it did because I was an early adopter. With my luck, it's amazing it didn't totally tank after I started investing in it. I'll be really hesitant to choose one format over the other for this next go. I can't afford to buy even my absolute favorite movies TWICE more to get them on HD.

 

[Sean*O]

This is kind of funny. Used to be that everyone was demanding Blu-Ray as the HDTV format of choice. So here comes Sony with the Blu-Ray discs, and now people are upset and want Red/Blue laser HD-DVD because of a different codec.

Since it seems HD-DVD is intent on using Microsoft's WM9 codec, and it has been said that codec running with ~15Mbps outperforms MPEG2 running at ~27Mbps, I think the best thing Sony could do at this point would be to adopt a similarly efficient codec, like MPEG4.

The extra storage that Blu-Ray offers can only be a good thing. I like the extra 20 Gigs for audio. Uncompressed PCM? 7.1 SACD?

Also, it never hurts to have the space to crank up the video bitrate no matter which codec is being used. Differences in quality that we can't see today may become more apparent in the better displays/projectors of tomorrow. Headroom is always a good thing.

As far as costs go, a single layer Blu-Ray @ 25 Gigs holds almost as much as a dual layer HD-DVD @ 30 gigs. Which one of those will be cheaper to produce? I don't know, but I bet in time that the single layer Blu-Rays could be made cheaper than the dual layer HD-DVDs.

That is also something that worries me about Blu-Ray. If they were to adopt a more effieient compression sceme, I bet most releases would be on single layer discs only, and we would be less likely to see the ultra high end dual layer releases. But at least the potential would be there.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Actually, I thought everyone was hoping that the BluRay group would "get the picture" and open their pre-recorded format up to the possibility of a much more efficient, sophisticated, and high-quality codec like WM9.

Of course, also in doubt is the BluRay group's committment to high-quality multichannel audio. Most of us LD collectors are sick of listening to 5.1 DD DVDs that sound inferior to our "old fashioned" 2.0 16/44.1 PCM laserdiscs. I don't want to have to choose between a high-quality sounding format that has the surround limitations of matrixed effects or a poorer sounding format that has the advantages of discrete channel encoding. I want it all: a transparent digital audio format that is discrete mutli-channel by design. AOD sounds like its considering some good options to make available. So far, the best BluRay has even hinted at is DTS...and the datarate was never mentioned.

I want the best picture and sound quality possible. I don't care what the name of the format is that delivers it. Oh yeah...I want it to be non-degradable and have random-access play if I can have my way

-dave

 

[Rob Tomlin]

Having read this whole thread, I must say that I am quite surprised that so many here on HTF are actually worried about Columbia releasing titles in Blu-Ray HD by the end of 2005.

The way I see, anything that helps push the release of a HD disc is a good thing. I also want the best picture and sound quality possible, regardless of whether that is Blu-Ray or HD-DVD.

The next two years will be interesting!

 

[Lew Crippen]

I don’t know about anyone else Rob—but I’m concerned about another Beta/VHS fight.

 

[Brian-W]

That's not true at all David. It's been made clear many times including in Blu-Ray literature that was handed out at CES that uncompressed PCM is an option on Blu-Ray.

Your crusade should be with studios to support it, because there is zero guarantee that the studios would.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Brian,

thanks for the info. But in all fairness a PCM provision is not a real solution to the problem...PCM as an option is not viable for high-res multi-channel audio formats with real-time HD video content. There simply wouldn't be enough bandwidth. We might see a few 2.0 stereo high-res PCM releases but that's the best we could hope for. And it's the best the studios could do. I'd like to have high-res multichannel for my HD Amadeus and Moulin Rouge Disc. uncompressed PCM could never even be considered given its bandwidth needs.

That's why MLP, or other lossless compressed PCM packing scheme is essential. DTS has just announced a new lossless scheme that would a good solution as well.

 

[John Berggren]

I expect they'll bring out their "Big Bang" titles at launch to boost the format.
I wouldn't be surprised to see these titles ship in time for the first players:

Spider-man
Spider-man 2
Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon

I don't pay a LOT of attention to which studio owns what movie, so I'm not sure what else, but I'd say they are likely to bring out the big guns to encourage format growth quickly.

 

[Brian-W]

Are you sure about this? I'm not an engineer, so I'm going to guess here. But Blu-Ray certainly has the capacity (single layer disc) for a 2 1/2 movie + 2 1/2 hours of uncompressed multichannel PCM @ up to 96KHz.

As for bandwidth, I pulled this from Pioneer's site Pioneer DVD audio specs and it states 6 channels PCM @ 9.6Mbps (or 2 channels 192KHz @ 13Mbps). Going with the 9.6 number, added to the likely 23Mbps Blu-Ray video rate (might be 25, might be 19.7), and a theoretical maximum of 36Mbps, definitely allows for multichannel PCM. The Pioneer site talks in regards to DVD-Audio, but still applicable to Blu-Ray or HD-DVD

I'm not real technical

 

[Grant H]

The only thing I remember everyone demanding was using a blue laser instead of a red laser for HD content. I believe that was aimed more at the HD-DVD producers since we knew Blue-Ray would be, well blue.

Regarding Blue -Ray and sound, I'm surprised there's no talk of Sony Dynamic Digital Sound (SDDS). Then, Sony could sell lots of new receivers or player/receiver combos. They could go with the 8-channel variety to really tempt people. Then again, I guess if the decoder were built in and it had the analog 6.1 outputs any digital-ready receiver would work wouldn't it? The same for any other next-gen sound format. Sure hope all the HD decks have all the new spiffy decoders. I'd hate to have to upgrade my receiver AGAIN. Thing is where will I plug in my SACD if I go that route? Aaargh!! Guess I'll need a super-Universal unit that plays everything. Or a really expensive switcher. Better start saving now.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Brain,

you may be right. you raise some good points (though even if HD video and multi-channel PCM content would all fit...I don't know of any current d/a converter/surround processor set up for multichannel PCM formatting).

Grant,

Though it sounds like a cool idea at first, there are several problems with DSD on such a format:

1. Sony won't allow any digital output interface to send their DSD audio to an outboard processor. Which means you're talking about having to use 7.1 analog output from the DVD player!

2. Direct Stream Digital is not friendly to any sort of DSP processing. Think of the bass managment and center-channel large/small settings you take for granted on your $199 receiver. Can't do that with DSD unless you do it all analog ($$$ to do it right this way) or convert to PCM...which throws away your advantage for going DSD in the first place. Home theater audio *needs* to have such manipulatability (sp?) built into the sound formats given the host of environments that need to be configured upon playback.

 

[Michael St. Clair]

Warner is in the HD-DVD camp, and could roll out

Lord of the Rings
Harry Potter
The Matrix

Except for Spider-Man, Columbia is just barely cracking the yearly top 10 box office lately.

There is no way in hell I'll buy Blu-Ray based on Columbia support. I need at least Warner, Disney, and Fox. If those three choose a sole format, the rest will follow.

In the meantime, I'm sitting and waiting. I'm not buying two HD disc formats.

 

[Grant H]

Well, David, you answered the question I thought of today looking at my Star Wars Episode II poster and the SDDS logo. Don't know if I'd ever read about it before and just forgot, but was wondering looking at the D's if it was implying Direct Stream Digital.

Some companies (Philips for one) claim to have high quality output for management even when converting to PCM. I believe I read that my player(DVD963SA) is supposed to do it at a sample rate of 192 kHz. I know it's not the incredibly high sample rate DSD can achieve, but well into the realm where people supposedly can't discern a difference. Then again there are armies out there who can't appreciate a difference between DD and DTS.:rolleyes

Still, you're right. These methods are questionable and probably more trouble than their worth. Explains why Sony never pushed for SDDS on DVD.

Guess not too many of us have 7.1 analog inputs on our receivers either. I have a 6.1 receiver, but does it have 6.1 inputs? Probably not. I know my player only has 5.1 outputs which sucks since it supposedly has excellent D/A converters, but to use them I'd sacrifce my receiver's DD EX/DTS ES decoding. I would use my player's analog outputs if I could if only to avoid it's nasty audio dropouts on the layer changes (downright painful on DTS) through the digital output. Never, ever buy Philips!!

Regardless, I guess the next-gen HD format(s) have enough troubles to worry about.

 

[Mark Zimmer]

If Lord of the Rings (Jackson, not Bakshi, wiseguys) is a rollout title for Blu-Ray I'm afraid that I may have to be an early adopter.

 

[Michael St. Clair]

If there is a format war, you won't see LotR on Blu-Ray until it is resolved. Warner is in the HD-DVD camp, and there's a good chance that Disney is too.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Grant,

MY MISTAKE-

I misread your SDDS as "DSD". All my comments are true regarding DSD (what is used on super-audio CD) which is what I thought we were talking about since we had been talking about hi-res audio.

However, what you mention, SDDS, is merely sony's own lossly compression coded for film...basically their version of Dolby Digital. It is neither hi-resolution nor any improvement upon any current low-res/lossy system so lets thank our lucky stars they haven't tried to force it into the consumer-market and are content to leave it in the theatrical world.

 

[Grant H]

David, you confusing bastard!

Well, what you just said goes along with one thing I originally thought about posting--that maybe they just haven't brought SDDS up because it sucks!

I know the few times that I experienced it, it sounded very harsh, but I thought it was just cranked up too loud. My father and I saw a movie in it and had to put cotton in our ears. No joke.

 

[Michael St. Clair]

It offers more channels, but it is never coming to the home market.

 

[RISUG]

Color me foolish, but I'm going to sit the war out and go with whichever HD format rises as the victor in the pre-recorded home video market.

Sue me.