Why I haven't taken the plunge -yet. My take on all this. (1 Viewer)

[Nils Luehrmann]

Quite true, which is why studios cut down on inserts (except when they are used to generate advertising revenue), but at the same time studios have also increased their cost when it wasn't necessary so as too boost sales that cover the added cost and hopefully increase profit, which is the ultimate goal.

Let's just say for the moment that the studios make an average of $11 profit for every HD DVD sold, and that instead of passing on the added cost to the consumers for their BD releases, they only make $10 for every BD sold. If they sell 10% more BD discs then HD DVD discs, then their generated profit would be equal.

While BD players (in their latest form) are not out yet, judging by the support of the companies in the consumer electronic industry, Blu-ray stands to have at least a 5:1 advantage over HD DVD in regards to players. With that kind of additional customer base, sales from BD titles should easily outsell their HD DVD counterparts by more than 10%, some might even say several times more, but only when we have comparative sales figures next year will anyone know for sure.

 

[Dave Moritz]

I have no problem spending money on a upconverting dvd player. But if the player is thrown together and rushed to market. Why would I want it? Also why would I spend money on a format that does not have the flexibility to stay vaiable in the marketplace for a decent length of time? This format war is not good for the HD market and needs to end as soon as possible. Buying HD-DVD just because it out first and then buying Blu-ray later does not help HD gain acceptance with your average consumer.

Blu-ray has more studios, more companies making players, more room/storage for extras and audio options, better menu's and has the flexibility to stay around longer than HD-DVD. HD-DVD itself is not a horrible platform. On the contrary its a good platform but it was rushed to market only because Toshiba is desperate to hold on to royalties. If HD-DVD had more storage, more studio support and the players where better. Toshiba would have a very good chance of walking away with being the HD format that would replace DVD. But they played it safe in certain areas and rushed the player out so now they have to hope that they can out market Sony and win the war.

The only things that matter to me is picture performance, reliability, audio performance of surround tracks and the longevity of the format. The new HD format needs to last a minimum of 10 years IMHO. The offering of the new Dolby Digital Plus and or Dolby True HD, is nice but IMHO it will not affect if I buy a movie or not. DTS and DTS-HD will actually affect my decision to purchase a particular edition of a movie. While DD+ is said to be better its still a revamped version of DD IMHO. This will not be Dolby’s best offering as from what I have read the only competition to DTS-HD will end up being Dolby True HD. We shall see what happens once new surround receivers and pre-pro's are available with the new surround formats. And people can start listening to the new formats from HD-DVD or Blu-ray on there HDTV's.

As far as the LD thing goes, I still own a Marantz LD player and a small number of LD movies. I regret never getting the box set of Star Wars but I at least go the original THX LD or Star Wars so I don’t have to be stuck with the remakes of the originals. I can't wait for the originals to be out on dvd this year. I would not be surprised if Lucas turns around and resale’s the originals on one of the HD formats. I say that because Lucas claimed that the originals where gone and would not ever see video again. I can foresee Star Wars making continuing to make Lucas $$$ for the foreseeable future.

 

[JohnRice]

Against better judgement, ventures into the HD section. Starts reading this thread. Shudders. Picks out a movie to watch.

 

[Rachael B]

I can see you're a real DTS devotee Dave! I'm experimenting with the Toshiba's built-in surroud sound decoding starting last night. I watched Assault On Precinct 13 so I could try the player's DTS and Dolby. It's the only HD-DVD I have yet with any native DTS. I switched back and forth quite a bit. I couldn't come to any firm conclusions. Both sounded very good. The DTS was encoded louder but when you gave the Dolby more juice it was on par or there-about's, I thought. I'll be curious which Universal or maybe Paramount disc will next include some DTS.

You seem to follow DTS'es ups and down more than me. You haven't listened to as much of the high rate DTS and most especially as much high rate Dolby as me. What I'm telling you is that when you start moving beyond what you're accustomed to from DVD and get to better Dolby and DTS, the benefits of one over the other are not too obvious. I don't have to base this on anybody else's opinion. I've been listening to improved Dolby and really good DTS on D-VHS for several years now, and now I'm taking in HD-DVD.

I'm not clear on what kind of DTS I heard last night, if it was high-rate regular or some kind of MLP? Both it, and the Dolby were very excellent. The second feature was Unforgiven and it's Dolby was excellent. Before last night I was using the player's down-converted DTS out of the digital output. That was OK but at first glance, the player's analog output seem better. The rain in Unforgiven seemed so realistic....

DTS versus Dolby seems to be getting obsolete. It looks like they're both gonna be so good, it's just apples and oranges. Now, what stopping you from getting a Toshiba and watching ....Precinct 13? ...in DTS!

 

[Dave Moritz]

Hey Rachael B,

I have high bit rate LD DTS discs that blow DD away. I have been listening to Dolby Digital & DTS on LD, DVD and DVD-A discs for a number of years. I have heard DD & DTS on low end systems and very high end systems at CES. IMHO DD suffers from the use of dialog normalization which makes it seem like DTS is louder. I honestly feel that DTS produces cleaner, crisper more detailed sound that has more depth and has slightly better dynamics.

While I do not have a HD player with any new updated surround formats. I am looking forward to owning a Blu-ray player by the end of the year. I truely feel DTS offers the best surround experience. Some people prefere DD and some prefere DTS.

And just like any digital and analog hook up the only reason an analog input would sound better is if the d/a converter in the source is better than whats in the reciever. I use the digital out put from my dvd player because the processor in my reciever is the best way to listen to movies. I use a analog hookup from my cd player because the d/a in the player is better than my reciever.


Don't count DTS out yet as there are no DTS-HD decoders out yet and I hear that the Toshiba's player has issues with playing back full bandwith Dobly Digital Plus. What I want to hear is Dolby True HD and see how good that does sound. I have been to Dolby's web site and the way I read it, DD+ is there improved DD with more channels, but still has compression. And Dolby True HD is there lossess format and that should not have the compression ration of DD+ and should sound alot better than DD+. Like I said previously, Its allways possible that Dolby could retake the lead and make a better format. I still feel that the competion has helped consumer surround sound only get better. DTS came along and offered a better product and out did Dolby. I feel that this has only fueled Dolby to try to out do DTS and make a better product. Dolby has been in the industry for years and has been involved in Television, Movies and formats and noise reduction systems that have revolutionized the industry as we know it. I do recognize and realize that Dolby has been responsible for alot of what is used in sound reproduction. I think its good that we have a choice in audio formats on movies. I don't think its a great idea to have a company that has a monopoly like Dolby had for many years. In the home market they had no compition and thats why IMHO DTS came along and gave Dolby a wake up call.

And to answer your question on whats stopping me from getting a Toshiba HD-DVD player?

I was at one point going to give HD-DVD a chance. And honestly if alot of people did that it would not be a good thing. We need for there to be one format and we need for this format war to end as soon as possible.

The more problems I have read and heard about the less I want the Toshiba player anyway. More importantly IMHO HD-DVD does not offer the better solution for now or the future. Blu-ray has better data rate transfer, higher storage capacity that will make it possible for longer movies, more features and multiple 7 channel audio options. Blu-ray has a better chance to stay a viable format longer than HD-DVD IMHO. We need a format that will be around at least 10 years. I dont think any of us want to see a replacement come along in 6 years because the previous format didn't have the longevity to remain viable in the market place. Toshiba rushed this player to market and it is basically nothing more than a specialized laptop pc that only plays cd/dvd and hd-dvd discs. And then there is the small issue of its an ugly looking player, lmao.

I will be watching movies in HD and in DTS but I will wait for Blu-ray and the format that I truely believe is the format the offers the best performance and the best options. I will also at that point be checking out the difference between DD+ / Dolby True HD and DTS HD. I have been holding out on buying Precinct 13 on DVD because I want to buy it on an HD format. A small secondary reason is that after dvd-a and sacd I refuse to support two formats ever. While both formats where good, nether format gained favor and ever ended up with a large enough library to be sucessful. HD-DVD and Blu-ray have the potental to go the way of DVD-A and SACD. While there are still DVD-A and SACD discs being sold nether format is really going any where and is as good as dead. If Blu-ray does not survive I will most likely end up with a HD-DVD player. And hopefully by that time the players are made better and other companies are making players as well. I know that if Denon made a HD-DVD player it would kick Toshibas rear around the moon and back, ROFL.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Haven't read all the pages yet but wanted to clarify what seems to be a controversial and confused issue:

1080I versus 1080P from HD DVD/Blu-ray:

Yes, it's true the both formats store film material in native 1080p24 form.

yes, it's true that the Toshiba (and BD player too it's assumed) aren't applying any additional "down filtering" when they produce the 1080i60 output from 1080p encoded discs. So you're not losing any detail.

HOWEVER

In order to get "true 1080p" quality when you watch the 1080i60 output from an HD player, your display would need to apply proper 3-2 pulldown reversal just like it would to make a progressive signal from an interlaced DVD.

No difference.

Yes, even bob/weave deinterlaced 1080I looks great--because 1080i looks so detailed it would have to look great since even raw 1080i looks great. But real 3-2 reversed 1080P looks even better. And it's the *** ONLY *** right way to do it from film.

Folks who are suggesting (over at AVS you see this alot) that bob/weave is "good enough" haven't compared on the proper viewing eqiupment to resolve full vertical resolution. Those who have seen "real" 1080P (or 3-2 pulldpwn reversed reconstruction) compared to bob/weave detinerlaced 1080P say that the improvement is apparent and worthwhile...just like using real 3-2 pulldown to deinterlace a 480i dvd to 480p. The laws of frame reconstruction don't change with 1080 resolution.




ONLY if the display applye 3-2 pulldown reveral to reconstruct the 1080P signal upon display. Bob-weave deinterlacing (what's normal in most 1080P displays right now) does not give you the full 1080P quality of the source signal.

very few consumer HD displays (even those that are 1080 res) apply 3-2 pulldown when deinterlacing film-based 1080i60. Just because a display does 3-2 for 480P processing doesn't mean it also does it for 1080p processing.

Hopefully, this will change over the next few years as algorithms for proper 3-2 pulldown reversal become readily available (like they did when Faroudja put 480p processing on a chip that everyone could afford).


Robert is right when he wants to wait for 1080P compatible HD devices...if his set is missing 3-2 pulldown for film-based 1080I signals, it's the only way he'll be able to enjoy *true* 1080P from HD discs.

 

[Lew Crippen]

Dave, your post is more reasoned than your signature would lead one to believe.

Especially when one portion is misleading at best.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Hey Lew,

curious..what portion of the sig is misleading?

Thanks on the comment about my post. Nothing is all bad or all good. And certainly HD DVD is "good" if not out-right "great". My support for BD isn't because I think HD DVD is bad...it's because I think that over the life of our next HD disc-based format that BD has a few more advantages to offer (50 gig for instance) that may not make their mark the day of launch, but over the life of the format will have plenty of time offer the HT enthusiast some nice benefits.

Anyway, I'm not trying to turn this into yet another HD DVD versus BD thread so don't take that preceding paragraph the wrong way. I just mean to clarify that balance and objectivity is something that I do strive to acheive. That being said, I think that the higher capaity and bit-rate of BD garner it a few more long-term advantages over the also-excellent HD DVD format (hence the sig) which I also personally view to be a balanced/reasoned point of view.

-dave

 

[Nils Luehrmann]

Great post David, thanks for clarifying these issues.

I vote for "Be a Widescreen Advocate".

As I have said before, I've never liked that mantra as it will only suggest to new 16x9 TV owners that now EVERYTHING must be widescreen and fill their display.

Be an OAR Advocate

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Your wish is my command...

 

[Larry Sutliff]

Excellent!

 

[Rachael B]

Some people don't have blanket preferences for codecs. I don't. I was just kidding that you should get an HD-DVD player for the solitary title with native DTS. I stille think you haven't heard enough high-rate Dolby to have a feel on it. Dolby True HD and DTS HD may soon make all this idle chatter anyway?

I don't think the two Toshiba players are ugly. You do have a point that Denon could or might make a better HD-DVD player! Don't you think Sony's BD player is also going to be a HTPC in a box too? That's what I presume. I do feel like a beta tester with my Toshibas. I suspect I'll feel the same when I try a Blu-way player.

I think you over-estimate how problem plagued that the Toshiba players are. I've only had a problem with Full Metal Jacket and I think it's a bad disc. I'll be returning it. People don't post so much my player is doing wonderfully. They post or comment the most when things are amuck. My "ugly" players have done quite well, beautifully in fact. They've done nothing to make me too blue way laid yet....

 

[Lew Crippen]

David,

Sorry for the misunderstanding—I meant the other Dave, whose sig proclaims both DTS and Blu-Ray.

I just find it hard to trust that reasoning won’t be biased, when preferences are a part of one’s persona.

But as to your (David B) posts, I always read them and find that they contain food for thought—even when you are pushing the advocacy envelope (which I put down to a passion for audio and video).

I rarely find (what I consider) errors of substance in your posts—and less often that I cared enough to write a counter-argument. I especially find satisfying that you give the counter-position due merit, something that I find lacking in a great many advocates of one position or another.

 

[ChristopherDAC]

DaViD : notice I said "is capable" of a generic 1080p display — that is, this is a capability which a specific 1080p display may have. I certainly did not assert that any specific model does handle reverse 3-2 pulldown at HiVision resolutions. It was simply a blanket statement that, if these conditions are fulfilled, this is the result. I thought I was clear enough in my statement that an individual user might "not be able to trust his display to do this", but that one could not say in general that 1080p24 content cannot be transmitted through a 1080i30 connexion. That is, the objection might well be valid in a specific case, but does not form a "reason" in a general sense. Mind you, I'm all for transmitting things in their native formats ; I'm just a stickler for technical details.

 

[Dave Moritz]

I am all for being a Widescreen Advocate. :- )


I have to agree with David, whats so misleading about my sig?

Yes I support DTS and I support Blu-ray. Now it I said I was a Blu-ray supporter and HD-DVD then it would be misleading. Just because I am a DTS supporter and am willing to give Dolby a chance is not a negative in my book and, I don't feel its misleading.

 

[Lew Crippen]

The implication of The 1080P solution is that the other format is not (a 1080P solution).

Other than that the first HD-DVD player on the market is not 1080P, there is no reason that there will not be a plethora of 1080P, HD-DVD players in the future.

Besides which, 1080P is in the HD-DVD specifications.

You should substitute an indefinite article for your use of the definite ‘the’. That is, the second part of your signature should read: “Blu-Ray SUPPORTER. A 1080P solution.”

As for your prejudgment, I commented in an earlier post on your reasoned statements. Nonetheless, I suggest that your sig, makes it difficult to believe that you are able to judge fairly or impartially. The more so, as I don’t expect that you (or anyone) has had a chance to judge the new audio formats in a controlled fashion.

To blindly support one over another without having heard either is the very definition of prejudice.

Even so, I accept at face value your statement that you would be open to a fair comparison of both formats. That does not change the impression given when the very last thing in your posts is “DTS Supporter”.

 

[RobertR]

I will relate an incident for the enlightenment (and amusement) of others (of course, I expect that you will not allow your "true believer" status to be shaken by it):

I have a friend who used to work in the movie sound business. He invited Gary Reber, the publisher of Widescreen Review magazine (and one of DTS' most vocal and vociferous advocates) to a listening comparison between DTS and DD. The key component of the comparison was that it was done BLIND (ie Reber didn't know what format he was listening to). After listening to the same soundtrack with each format, Reber chose....Dolby as the better sounding one.

As I said, I fully expect that you will dismiss this bit of information as inapplicable to you.

 

[ChristopherDAC]

Remember, theatrical dts is not the same codec as home dts. Theatrical Dolby Digital is the same as home Dolby Digital, but at a lower bitrate.

I think Dave Moritz is entitled to say "Blu-ray : The 1080p Solution" if he feels Blu-Ray is the format which is the long-term solution to the 1080p video question : that is to say, if he feels that it solves problems which HD DVD leaves unsolved, so as to make it more complete.

 

[Dave Moritz]

I have stated more than once that I would love to hear Dolby's new offerings and see how good they are. But I guess because I said I think DTS is supperior that negates or cancels me saying I want to hear Dolby and hear how good there new formats are.

As for my sig, I am not changing it until I come up with something I want to change it to! But your opinion is duely noted :- )

To be honest Robert I honestly do not believe that as Dolby has tried to put out those type of so called blind test in the past. All I know is that when I listen to movie I prefer DTS. DTS IMHO has a better sound stage, has better depth and has a cleaner and not so compress sounding center channel. Some of the discs I have used to compair are Lord Of The Rings EE, Saving Private Ryan, X Men, Gladiator and Airforce One plus some other well know movies. I believe that Dolby Digital actually is different from home Dolby Digital. I remember a tour of a theatrical theater I had a few years ago. The regional manager for Edwards Cinima's gave me a tour of the theater. He showed me the projection boths and all the different surround formats that they where using. At the time they used DTS, Dolby Digital and SDDS. I was told that DTS in his opinion was the best sounding and best performing system they had. They rarely had a problem with DTS tracks and the format was rock solid every performance. With Dolby Digital on of the biggest problems that affected sound quality was the error rate that they exsperienced most of the time. He said that Dolby had an average error rate that they said they could exspect. But in real world use they where getting higher error rates decoding DD. He even showed me the display on the Dolby decoder that showed the error rate. He also said they would get drop outs in the audio from time to time. This is most likely because the digital audio is stored on the edge of the film where it is most voulnerable. And while he said depending on the how the movies audio was mixed SDDS was capible of outdoing Dolby. He said the biggest problem with SDDS was that if the decoder failed it defaulted to mono or stereo. Also the more the film was used and the film streched the SDDS track became unsycronized with the picture.

Granted these type of problems do not exsist in the home enviroment and the accustics are much different. I have heard some decent sounding Dolby tracks, dont get me wrong but most of them have a compressed or muddy quality to them. Some of this I would attribute to dialog normalization which I feel is unessary and accomplishes nothing. I will say this again if Dolby's new surround formats are awsum then you will most likely see my DTS supporter sig change or just be dropped. I still do very much enjoy a good DTS track and I will still enjoy them even if I end up liking the new Dolby formats. At that point I will have to go out and buy a Dolby True HD plaque for my HT.

Hey ChristopherDAC you summed it up in regaurds to my sig, lol. :- )

 

[Lew Crippen]

Of course he is entitled to say it: it just happens to be an incorrect statement. If there are problems with HD-DVD (and no doubt there are) in order for Dave’s statement to be accurate, those problems would need to be specifically with 1080P—other problems have nothing to do with 1080P.