To All HTF Members: The "HD-DVD ONE FORMAT ONLY!" campaign begins...with YOUR help! (1 Viewer)

[ChrisA]

Actually, You must have missed that Toshiba has a READ/WRITE capability of 40 Gig storage and 36 mbps bandwidth... www.nec.com

 

[Brian-W]

2. Blu-Ray will be in a (DVD-RAM looking??) cartridge.

YES! AMEN!
Why? I can't tell you how many shipments of DVDs I've received where the disc was "floating" in the package from either a spindle that wasn't secure, or a broken spindle (and scratched disc subsequently).
Not to mention kid friendly in a way.
Almost 1/3 of my collection has some kind of packaging spindle issue (and of that, 90% of the packages are Amaray cases). Luckily, I have yet to have a disc not work or be problematic from scratches due to the packaging issue.
And no, I'm not suggesting the cartridges will be impervious anyway. But certainly better than discs now
-brian

 

[Dan Hitchman]

Why not a protective caddy cartridge for HD-DVD, using dual layered Blue-Ray (if they can't come up with something better within 3-5 years)?

As it is any high pit density disc will have a boat load of troubles with dirt, scratches, fingerprints, dust, etc. and it will never fly in a rental environment as regular red-laser DVDs barely hang on by a thread. I'd like to have that extra security blanket.

The more I think about it, the more I like Blue-Ray instead of the Toshiba/NEC proposal.

And who's to say a more accurate/efficient/powerful video compression codec couldn't be created beyond MPEG-2 allowing for far better audio than what we get now with DTS and Dolby Digital.

Instead of rushing out the door with the first idea they should wait a little bit to do this right the first time.


UPDATE:

I just saw pictures of Sony's prototype Blue-Ray recorder on the AVS Forum. Although only a work-in-progress and single layer compatible, it's a beauty! I can see that the Blue-Ray disc is enclosed in a non removable cartridge that protects the disc while outside the player. The tray mechanism looks like it has an air tight seal so that once the disc is exposed on the inside of the player, no dust or debris can get in to mar its surface.

A pretty nifty piece of engineering.

Now, if they approve this technology instead of Toshiba/NEC's blue disc they will definitely need to OK the dual layered, 50 GB version for consumer home video usage.

Dan

 

[Eric F]

Did we mention DTS 96/24 as the standard DTS track when a 24bit source is available?

Anyone actually hear DTS 96/24 yet?

 

[Mike Capulli]

I believe the new Queen DVD-Audio disc (by DTS Ent.) is DTS 96/24. Unless as somebody had mentioned before.. its not truely 96/24 and its just a marketing strategy...
correct me if im mistaken.

BTW would the cartridge idea really be able to stop dust buildup even if it has been sitting on a shelf for months? I dont think anything can stop microscopic dust buildup.

 

[Eric F]

Mike, don't get me wrong, I realize there are a few DTS produced DVD-Audio discs with a DTS 96/24 track (I have the Fabulous T-Birds one), I was just curious to if anyone actually heard one.

You do need totally new hardware to decode it, which seems kind moot to put it on there, because the folks with receivers to decode DTS 96/24 would probably own DVD-A players anyways.

It would be a logical upgrade for movies though, as it takes less space than the lossless MLP format used for DVD-Audio and it supposedly sounds almost as good.

 

[Dan Hitchman]

Mike Capulli,

You keep saying that DTS 24/96 can't really encode at 24 bit word lengths, and 96 kHz sampling and that it's all just marketing.

Do you have specific, factual information to back this up (besides what the PR drones at Dolby say), or are you just speculating?

Dan

 

[Eric F]

As long as we're doing the 96/24 thread here, I'm not sure why it would be in DTS' interst to say it's 24bit when it's not. I believe alot of the confusion with the format comes from the initial push which made alot of us (myself included)believe that you wouldn't need new hardware (or at least software) to get the full benefit. This, as we know now is not true.
Check out #8&9 on the Faq:
http://www.dtsonline.com/consumer/faq.shtml

 

[Dan Hitchman]

I guess I'll reiterate in more detail about what I said recently on the AVS Forum on all this:
The very, bare minimal standard I will accept from HD-DVD video discs (not including HD-DVD audio in the discussion) will be:
1) Mandatory, true 1920 x 1080p video at 24 fps and 30 fps (from the best 1080p masters) with the best compression algorithm available at high bitrates and no edge enhancement or filtering added. No 720p and no 1080i, just the best 1080p output (the player can handle downconversion to the particular TV's native rate if it can't currently handle 1080p).
2) Mandatory DTS 5.1 24/96 encoding at full bitrate or DTS-ES Discrete 6.1 (for all 6.1 material) encoding at full bitrate.
3) High bitrate 2 channel encoding, not the current 192 kilobits/sec for DD 2.0 material.
4) High resolution subtitle fonts that stay within the picture frame.
5) Specs. that include provisions for uncompressed (if possible) or MLP compressed 8 channel, ultra high resolution PCM or lossless compressed DSD tracks (choose PCM or DSD, not both unless quick accommodations for both in the specs. can be made so the choice is left to the disc's producer) that could be added later on due to advancements in the format.
6) Built in 20x9 (approx. ratio) widescreen enhancement capabilities that can be added now or at a later time. http://www.digitaldreamtheaters.com/Enhanced HDDVD.htm Digital front projectors are getting more popular as we speak and the ability to project a wider ratio movie at full resolution would be a wonderful add-on.
7) Audio (for the one primary language track) and video streams set at the highest bitrates first and any room left over can be used for extras. Quality first, quantity only if possible after these requirements are met.
8) Two or more discs can be used if extra bandwidth is needed to add higher resolution audio tracks and/or for longer than average films.
9) An adherence to the material's Original Aspect Ratio (OAR) will be maintained at all times. No ifs, ands, or buts.
Any objections to these minimal standards? Would anyone like to start a petition if we meet with no success on the other petition? We do need a minimum benchmark if we expect to have better than D-VHS discs made available.
Dan

 

[Lewis Besze]

About using MLP as the audio standard... There is still no digital interconnect for MLP, and I don't want to have to connect six more wires to my A/V receiver. And has Hollywood gone audiophile, making soundtracks using 24/96? They might be using 24 bits for the wide dynamic range but I don't think they're sampling at 96K. I'm not keen on asking Hollywood to change the way they make theatrical soundtracks for the benefit of HD-DVD, and I like to focus on what is practical based on what Hollywood is doing right now and in the near (not distant) future.

This isn't around the corner yet the digital connection is inevitable though in the near future.It doesn't have to be 24/96,the point is to loose the severly compressed formats we have right now.The original masters are uncompressed as well there isn't a need for a "change".

 

[Terrell]

Mandatory DTS 5.1 24/96 encoding at full bitrate or DTS-ES Discrete 6.1 (for all 6.1 material) encoding at full bitrate.

I can agree with all of those except that one Dan. That's highly doubtful. I'd like to see DTS, but Dolby Digital is the official surround format for DVDs. That's not going to suddenly change when HD-DVD comes around. DD will still probably be the official format. Don't you think, unless they go a different route altogether.

 

[Dan Hitchman]

HD-DVD is a new standard just as the disc formats being touted by Sony and Toshiba/NEC are new standards with new rules to play by.

I'm just saying that full bitrate DTS can be made mandatory just like DD is now. There would definitely be enough room this time around for at the very least full 1.5 Megabit/sec DTS (24/96 or Discrete 6.1) and 500+ kilobit/sec Dolby Digital at the same time.

I'm hoping for high rez MLP 6-8 channel surround, but knowing the parties involved don't think that far into the future or are as concerned with quality as we all are here, I would want at least full bitrate DTS to be a minimal standard for HD-DVD.

Dan

 

[Terrell]

I don't necessarily disagree, but is that realistic given Dolby's dominance in the market, especially since they pretty much invented the concept of surround sound?

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Terrell,

Dan isn't saying what he thinks the studios will do given their own devices, he's saying what they *should* do to produce a good sounding disc.

The importance of telling the studios what they SHOULD do, even if it seems unrealistic based on their political issues etc., is to let them know that the consumer base does in fact care about audio and video quality and that DVD has problems that HD-DVD should fix. That's the best we can do...tell them what they *should* do from the perspective of the audio/videophile. Then, with any luck, the format we get...though it may not represent our demands in every regard, will hopefully reflect some of those priorities which otherwise they never would have bothered to consider.

Even the folks at Warner seem to think that 348 kbps DD is just fine...and they don't see the need to offer 16x9 encoding for 1.66:1 transfers either. Most of these companies just "don't get it" about sound and picture fidelity. That's why it's our job to help educate them. It just might get us a better HD-DVD format.

-dave

 

[Eric F]

I agree that DTS 96/24 should be the standard for DTS tracks when there is a 24bit DTS source available (as they are becoming more and more). Whether or not the studio decides to do a remix in that format for home use is up to them. I don't think it should be mandatory. As we've heard some of the current 5.1 remixes for older material have been attrocious, without an option to hear the orginal track.

As for MLP or some other lossless format. Didn't someone mention that MLP was bought up by Dolby? If it is it's a good sign that it might be an option, or some other lossless format by them. I think Dolby pretty much has the situation all locked up. Although since DVHS has a higher bitrate track, it's quite possible (and most likely) there will be some sort of Dolby equivalent to DTS 96/24 in the near future.

Does anyone know what the highest bitrate could be for current Dolby Digital tracks for current home decoders?

 

[Dan Hitchman]

I misspoke. When I meant mandatory full bitrate DTS 24/96 or full bitrate DTS-ES Discrete 6.1, I meant for source material that can take advantage of it (like 5.0 to 6.1 discrete master tracks). However, I believe DTS can do more than just 5.0 to 6.1 channel tracks, it just hasn't been used for 1.0, 2.0, etc. channel stuff (although some DTS CDs were 4.1 encoded). If that is indeed the case then DTS should be used on all HD-DVDs.

I think ~576 kilobits/sec is the highest consumer Dolby Digital decoders can go.

Dan

 

[Shane Martin]

I think ~576 kilobits/sec is the highest consumer Dolby Digital decoders can go

I think its 6xx if I remember correctly. I'm pretty sure that is what is on D Theater right now.

 

[Wayne Bundrick]

Dolby Digital can go up to 640 Kbps and it's said that every A/V receiver which can decode Dolby Digital can handle it. The DVD format is limited to 448 Kbps due to a concrete decision on the size of a particular memory buffer inside the DVD player. Actually the memory buffer size was chosen to be large enough to handle 384 Kbps, but since RAM is always counted in multiples of powers of two, it turns out that the nearest convenient multiple which was enough to do 384 Kbps is also big enough to do 448 Kbps.

I'm not in favor of demanding that HD-DVD have mandatory this and mandatory that. I think the software -- what goes on the disc -- should be very flexible with no hardfast minimums, and the hardware should accomodate that flexibility. It should be possible to put 1080p, 720p, 1080i, and yes even 480p and 480i on the discs. (Why eliminate the opportunity to fit a six hour TV miniseries at DVD quality on a single disc by not allowing 480i?) The only thing that has to be mandatory is that the player must be able to decode all of the above and output it in some fashion. Now here is where HD-DVD players can differ. I expect most will have 1080i output, downconverting any 1080p and 720p and upconverting 480p and 480i to 1080i. Maybe some will have a distinct 480p output for 480p/480i discs. It's possible there will be cheap players that can do only 480p/480i output. It should not be mandatory that all HD-DVD players be able to output 1080p. Decode it, yes, but not output it. That capability can be built into more expensive players for those who need it. It will become commonplace if the need for it becomes commonplace. Ditto for 20:9. Allow (but not require) it on the discs, and require players to either downconvert it or output it natively.

There should be no minimum bit rate for the video. Toshiba/NEC are proposing a recordable format at the same time as the read-only format. Blu-Ray is at this point recordable with the read-only format forthcoming. If you expect to be able to record HDTV from broadcast or satellite then you can't set minimum rates that are too good for them. Broadcast is merely 19 Mbps with Dolby Digital at 384 Kbps. Satellite may have an even lower rate.

The audio format should have similar flexibility. At this point all of the manufacturers know how to do Dolby Digital, DTS, and MLP, so the HD-DVD player should have support for all of these. But again what goes on the disc should be flexible. Dolby Digital at 640 Kbps is nice, as is DTS at full rate, and MLP is lossless. But there shouldn't be a minimum mandate. Dolby Digital at 384 or 448 Kbps shouldn't be denied on this format, one reason is as I explained in the paragraph above. Another reason is that there may be some future audio format added to discs and players later, but similar to the DTS situation with DVD, the discs must still have a standard audio track, and Dolby Digital at 448 Kbps would suffice.

And I agree that subtitles should have enough resolution to match the video.

Yes, all of this creates the possibility of subpar discs on the market which are 1080i 16:9 letterboxed instead of 1080p 20:9 anamorphic and have Dolby Digital at 384 Kbps instead of MLP. I don't have a problem with it. Let the market decide whether such discs are worth buying.

 

[Glenn Overholt]

Interesting arguments, all. I've been reading this with a so-so, attitude, but do remember...
1. HD-DVD's in cartridges will be interesting for a DVD changer, but I can't wait to see what the new megachangers would look like.

2. Also, I see everyone wants every audio format known to man. I just want the friggin' disk to play. I can see it now. I'll have to choose shit-screen or widescreen, and then DD, DTS, etc., just to get the movie started! Even with the disks I have now, most of them require at least one extra button to push.

Glenn

 

[Jeff Jacobson]

You should be able to set defaults on the player. For example, on my current DVD player, you can set the default audio and subtitle language. If the disc has audio or subtitles in that language, it will use those by default.

Is there any reason that this couldn't be done with different video resolutions and audio formats as well?