 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
66.167.61.88
....other than the early adopters who invested in HD-DVD ? Blu-Ray has higher storage capacity and higher video/audio bandwidth/bitrate capability which translates into higher picture and sound quality, everything else being equal.
One example: "KIng Kong" became a reference disc for PQ but they didn't have the room to put a 24 bit lossless audio track and still put in the frills at the same time. The same video encoding on a 50G Blu-Ray would also have allowed the lossless audio track, and probably in multiple languages and/or with added frills. I'm also hearing complains about "Blood Diamond", with less than stellar PQ based on low-bit rate VC-1 encode and perhaps indifferent TLC by the video encoders/compressionists. The reason for the low bit rate encode ? Probably the 30G HD-DVD limitations.
The arguments for HD-DVD ? Okay they have IME and interactive internet capability I wouldn't couldn't care less about in the HT room. Okay, In a year's time, I expect Blu-Ray to have a similar feature set when they get BD-J etc... worked out.
HD-DVD mandated TrueHD in all their players. 5.1 TrueHD IS a capability I'd like to have, but I expect future Blu-Ray players are going to support 5.1 TrueHD simply to keep up with the competition. I'd expect in a years time, the only Blu-Ray players without TrueHD will be the bottom-of-the-line Wal-mart specials for the customers who wouldn't appreciate TrueHD anyway. You'd better believe my next player(s)/prepro will have TrueHD decoding ability. In the meantime, I'll "make-do" with the uncompressed LPCM tracks I get with the Sony/Buena Vista releases; even the Fox DTS HD MA (with core 1.5M DTS) discs are very good.
HD-DVD players are cheaper. I fully expect Blu-Ray to be just as cheap when Economies of Scale start to kick in. Keep in mind we are still in low-sales volume mode.
Not enough 50G Blu-ray discs to go around to take advantage of that storage capacity ? I doubt this is an issue at current sales volumes, even if it is, it's only temporary as Sony is gradually cranking up the manufacturing capabilities.
The real advantage Blu-Ray has is exclusive studio support from Sony, Fox, and Disney. HD-DVD has exclusive support only from Universal (if Universal goes format neutral, the format war is decided). Combine this with a technically superior format and you have to wonder why anyone thinks HD-DVD has a shot at pre-empting Blu-Ray ? Or why anyone would even want both formats to survive if the format war is keep shoppers away ?
HD-DVD got the early start and still has an advantage in available frills (e.g. IME), but this is only a temporary advantage. The early sales advantage HD-DVD had initially has disappeared and Blu-Ray now has the edge in software sales.
Follow Ups:
You are too biased to make a fair comparison between the two formats. Every negative about Blu-ray you seem to make an excuse for and every positive for HD DVD you 'expect' Blu-Ray to have something similar in the future (more excuses).
More space is only an advantage if it's being used and if it's being used appropriately. As someone has already stated, disc space has not been an issue for HD DVD but if it makes you feel any better a 51 GB tri-layer disc was announced a few months ago for HD DVD. Some Blu-ray discs are 50 GB but most are not. There is no proof that Blu-ray is a "technically superior format". In fact, initially the majority of Blu-ray releases were by far inferior. Because of that, there are far more bad quality Blu-ray titles than HD DVD titles on the market. Currently it depends on the mastering of the disc, neither is better than the other. BTW, the Sony BETA format was technically superior to the VHS format but it didn't make any difference did it.
Both formats can use the same codecs (MPEG-2, VC-1, MPEG-4). Both formats also have 1080p/24 on their disc. For audio, Blu-ray uses Dolby Digital and HD DVD user Dolby Digital Plus (downconvertable to Dolby Digital). Both formats can use uncompressed linear PCM, Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master Audio. How many of the vast majority of consumers, who just want to relax and watch a movie with a really good picture, do you think even care about any difference in the audio or for that matter can even tell the difference. I'm guessing that it's not really an issue for about 99.5% of them including myself.
The fact that HD DVD players are substantially cheaper is a huge advantage when talking about the general public. Toshiba has several more even cheaper models coming out. HD DVD is only supported exclusively by Universal but it is also supported by Warner, Paramount, New Line and the adult entertainment industry. I personally would not mind seeing Sony fail. They are an arrogant company with extremely poor product support and customer service and they have no respect for their customers. Maybe they'll just give up on Blu-ray like they did with SACD.
It might not always be implemented correctly; especially with the early releases. But the potential is there and some of the more recent high profile releases are taking advantage of this (POTC, Apocalypto, Flags of Our Father) as the use of 50G Blu-ray discs rise. In fact, I expect, the use of 25G Blu-Ray will drop off, just as 15G HD-DVDs are seldom used. As far as Tri-layers are concerned, Blu-Ray can also play this game. In fact, quad layer 200G Blu-ray discs have already entered the rumor mills. Still, I doubt anything larger than dual layer will ever hit the studio HD movie market.
An interesting question is will the LOTR movies fit on a single disc ? I think the chances are likelier with Blu-Rays' 5/3x storage capacity.
I would expect most people posting in the Asylum also care about audio quality. HT is an audio-video experience; not just a video experience. Everyone I've talked to who has listened to HD lossless soundtracks has been suitably impressed with the experience. Granted, the folks I talk to appreciate the benefits of a good HT and a good audio setup to go with that HT. I use the same setup for Multichannel SACD/DVD-A, so I'm already set up to appreciate high resolution audio tracks for HD video.
HD-DVD is cheaper now, but I expect both formats are going to get even cheaper down the road. Whether Blu-Ray can achieve economies of scale to make it just as cheap as HD-DVD to produce remains to be seen, but it's a definite possibility. It's still too early in the game and sales volume are miniscule (compared to DVD) so who knows what will happen ?
So far, available storage/bandwidth issues between the two formats hasn't demonstrated that there's much difference QC-wise; time will tell. For my tastes HD-DVD seems to have an edge in respect to available software (popular movies). Of course that may change as the number of desirable Blu-ray titles increase. The way I see it, if software prices remain competitive, affordable dual format machines are the real solution for film lovers frustrated with having to choose between competing formats; that eventuality may make these debates a moot point if this format war drags on for years.
BTW, Oscar, while I'm not invested in either format yet, I do have the Oppo DV981HD 1080P upscaling player partnered with a new Samsung 40" 1080P TV for the second system. Currently my intention is to buy a few HD-DVD titles in anticipation of purchasing a dual format player by year's end. Don't get me wrong, I agree that Blu-Ray seems to have certain advantages if implemented properly, but if I get impatient after acquiring several more HD titles I may have to pull the trigger for one of the cheaper HD format players while I'm waiting for an affordable dual format job.
Cheers,
AuPh
I acquisced to the "early adopter" price knowing full well a year would bring a more mature product at lower prices. I could no longer hold out with an all-too-brief moratorium on DVD purchases in anticipation of HD video content, but my display kept asking me to feed it HD sources. (And if it wasn't for the dual player, I may have opted for the game console; the PS3 picture also looked purty darn good on my screen).
I don't expect either format to disappear quickly. But if it happens it wil probably be HD-DVD. If Universal goes format-neutral, game over, no reason to buy HD-DVD except for current (temporary?) hardware price advantages. The lukewarm (current non-support) from Fox for Blu-Ray is disturbing. A slew of desirable titles got put on hold and they are still holding back (BD+ DRM ? BD-J ? disc manufacturing capacity issues ? poor sales ? 2nd thoughts ?).
A lot can happen in the run-up to the Christmas season. Which movies are going to be released on which formats for the holiday season ? How much will prices fall for either format ? Will there even be mass market adoption or is HD to be relegated to a niche market ?
It's part of the digital revolution that's upgrading television viewing from 4:3 Academy to 16:9 WS and from 460P to 760P and on to 1080I & 1080P); I believe that this is the driving impetus to higher resolution video distribution & software.
The way I see it, and the reason why this isn't comparable to earlier video wars where formats orphaned leaving early adoptors in the lurch (as Beta was to VHS, CED was to LD & DIVX was to DVD), is that the technology and desire for market share is out-pacing the war strategies and being driven from the front end (HD television delivery systems). As the pricing of players is forced down through competition and dual format players become more readily available the format orphaning issue will become moot.
IMHO, the only things currently standing in the way of HD format acceptance are 1) competitive hardware and software pricing, as in competitive with the current SD format players and software and 2) region coding issues which may restrict playing legit releases of prized international film fare once it's transfered to European and Asian HD formats. Note: This is another area where Blu-ray (in particular) may meet resistance from international film collectors as HD-DVD hasn't required a vigorous region lock-out as part of it's codec, but the ease of acquiring content from other regions is a factor to consider.
AuPh
If BD+ works (and I'll be surprised if it doesn't get hacked effectively), Blu-Ray will have a huge advantage from a studio perspective.
I agree I'd rather not worry about region coding. HD-DVD has this advantage going for it. I'm just not convinced of HD-DVDs long-term longevity. Who is more likely to "Cry Uncle" first: the Blu-ray exclusive studios: Sony, Fox, and Disney; or Universal (HD-DVD exclusive) ? Or none of the above, in which case the retailers are doomed to support HD dual inventories.
I think that it's one of those "if ya snooze you lose" scenarios and the Studios are well aware of it having been caught napping before. The support for one format over the other is soft for a good reason, and that reason is the unpredictability of consumer acceptance.
Consumer acceptance, as I see it, is based on a variety of factors:
1) Price point for hardware & software
2) Backwards compatibility with existing SD format software
3) Picture quality on the current display device the consumer owns
4) Availability of highly desired films to showcase that quality
Even though Blu-ray seems to have the upper hand with the majority of studios, the aggressive lowering of prices for HD-DVD hardware and availability of popular titles will probably impact public acceptance since the two formats are virtually indistinguishable quality-wise based on recent comparisons. Studios are beginning to opt for releasing key titles in both formats knowing that consumers will sit on the fence if forced to forgo purchasing a favorite movie because it was released on the 'wrong' format. So, with dual inventories and similar picture quality it will become more of an issue of pricing than availability in the near future.
As an aside, even though technical geeks would like consumers to believe that disc space is an important consideration, what really matters is perceived picture quality in A/B comparisons, and since picture quality is roughly equivalent the greater space on Blu-ray may not matter one iota in the scheme of things. Unfortunately, even with the added disc space the facts don't appear to favor SONY because, 1) so far the two formats are virtually indistinguishable when playing movies, 2) Blu-ray discs, which require the Durabis coating (see below), are more difficult to produce in quantity and therefore more expensive, and 3) SONY's Blu-ray machines are far more expensive than their HD-DVD counterparts.
Finally, the region coding issue which favors Studios is only seen as an undesired obstacle to savvy consumers. Most consumers aren't especially concerned with the piracy issues because they only buy high quality legitimate releases anyway. If anything, consumers probably see the robust copy protections and region coding as just another means to tack higher costs onto the product while restricting viewer's options.
> > > "I'm just not convinced of HD-DVDs long-term longevity. Who is more likely to "Cry Uncle" first: the Blu-ray exclusive studios: Sony, Fox, and Disney; or Universal (HD-DVD exclusive) ? Or none of the above, in which case the retailers are doomed to support HD dual inventories." < < <
Good points, but the bottom line is that this isn't going to be a matter of which format cries "UNCLE" first, it's going to be decided by the "Dutch Uncle" represented by Studios and the spending habits of the Studios favorite nephews and nieces, ...the CONSUMER! For awhile the dual inventory issue will probably remain unresolved, but eventually lower prices and/or reasonably priced dual format players will make this a non-issue as well for retailers with limited shelf space.
Next-up, I predict thin-line cases for Blu-ray & HD-DVD discs. :o)
Cheers,
AuPh
Buy both. Who cares!
"Format-neutral" studios releasing discs optimized for one format or the other, at the expense of the other format.
In a title on different formats with the picture quality and sound quality?
Can you give some examples? TIA!
What can happen is a studio will constrain a movie release to work within the constraints of a Blu-Ray single layer (25G) disc instead of allowing for the storage capacity of a dual layer (30G) HD-DVD disc. This might be done for economic reasons (only one set of video compression required). This forces the video bitrate to be slightly lower than needed for the HD-DVD release. Or a movie release will be designed to work within the constraints of HD-DVD (30G) instead allowing for the 50G DL Blu-ray disc capacity. Again, this forces the video bitrate to be significantly lower than than allowed by the larger capacity format.
It's a matter of debate how significant the differences are between low and high bitrate VC-1 and AVC encodes. There are those who will claim the Blu-Ray "Flags of Our Father" and "PRestige" relatively high bitrate AVC encodes are superior in PQ to the HD-DVD encodes using a lower bit rate VC1 encode. Another example I've read about is the Blu-Ray AVC encode for "Coming to America" is inferior to the HD-DVD VC1 encode of the same movie. The Blu-Ray is a single layer with 5G less space to play with so the encode has to be at a lower bitrate. Coincidence ? Maybe not a large sampling from which to draw (Premature?) conclusions, but time will tell with future releases of higher bitrate encodes on 50G discs.
Also, for whatever reason (storage/bandwidth constraints perhaps?), there are more Blu-Ray discs with uncompressed PCM tracks than for HD-DVD. On every disc I've ever done comparisons with, the uncompressed PCM is considerably better than their lossy DD counterparts. The 50G Blu-Ray discs give you a lot of flexibility video and audio bitrates that can't be duplicated with 30G HD-DVD discs.
BTW, I beleive Weinstein uses AVC on their movies, and they look very good from what I've seen.
Jack
....My current source can't decode either 5.1 TrueHD or DTS HD MA so having uncompressed PCM is highly desirable for my current setup. Since both HD formats are still evolving (particulary Blu-Ray), any current player is merely a stopgap from my perspective. Heck, I feel the itch to upgrade my display and my current pre/pro is 10+ years old.
As a general rule, movies that are on both formats look identical. Sometimes one will have better audio than the other, but for the most part, the same master and codec (encoding) is used for both. There are a few exceptions. Paramount used different codecs for some of their movies.
Jack
Buy two, get one free. Numbers are in need of boosting.:-)
The two Pirates movies only sold 23.5K each.
enjoy,
Jack
Okay, PQ is pretty good but it wasn't the world-beater everyone hyped about.
"Apocalypto" is one I don't have; the movie itself is getting a pretty good review (despite the Mel Gibson anti-bias). I might actually pick this one up. PQ and SQ are supposed to be very good as well. Not sure what else would interest me though.
I'm trying not to doubledip because of a fairly decent DVD library. HD video is going to have to compete with everyone else's existing DVD libraries on catalog re-issues; the studios better make it worthwhile, especially at the prices they are charging (e.g. Current version of "Fifth Element" won't cut it for me).
As Jack says, you are arguing BD's merits based on what it *could potentially be someday*, not what it is today, and that's a mistake. IMO, HD DVD as it exists today is good.
For my viewing preferences, HD DVD currently offers a few more titles that I want to watch, but that's me.
I don't know whether either format will exist in 5 years time, but I do know that I'm having fun right now, and gosh, 1080p video looks spectacular.
I'm also not saying I won't buy a Playstation 3 within the next few months. But you are kidding yourself if you think it's a "safer" buy!
and disc sales. But if it takes eliminating one format for either to survive, I'll pick Blu-Ray to survive. It's got the edge on major studio support, if not actual releases. If the upcoming BD+ DRM actually works (I doubt it will), Blu-rays' survival is guaranteed.
HD-DVD is the cheaper buy (at least for now, I expect that to change in the next year or so), it would be hard to argue it's the "safer" buy. I hedged my bets, I opted for the combo player to feed that 110" display, knowing there is still a painful product maturation process and format war still going .
It's been in their Top 10 for some time now. In Blu-Ray, it's #17 and by far the top-selling B-D title listed. "Pirates" briefly unseated it in B-D but has since dropped to #54.
Don't put too much faith in support from major movie studios, because that support can evaporate overnight if they feel there's no money to be made: Look what happened to Sony's Universal Media Disk (UMD).
Planet Earth has sold 42,000 copies, probably both formats together. The Departed sold 100,000 combined. Pirate-23,500 each. Matrix Boxes, 17,000. There are titles that probably haven't hit the 1000 mark yet.
These are not impressive numbers. This is why I always laugh when some boob gets online and says something like "BD is Killing HD DVD!" or my personal fave, "CONTENT RULES!" :-)
HD has a long hard road ahead of it. The likelyhood of these being being niche formats is quite high, and I don't have a problem with that. Time will tell. Its possible, that nothing will happen untill 2009, when the digital/HD switch is turned on.
Jack
What would change 3 months from now unless perhaps you don't have the money now?
Price would need to drop and better games need to be released before I'd go that route for Blu Ray.
"What would change 3 months from now unless perhaps you don't have the money now?
Price would need to drop and better games need to be released before I'd go that route for Blu Ray."
I don't expect for anything to be different by then, except maybe I'll have a hankering for a new toy, and compared to friends who buy new cars or spend $70+ for satellite or cable TV every month, my buying a PS/3 is relatively harmless ;-) To be honest, I'm well aware it's an iffy buy that may mostly collect dust. But I'll occasionally make a "risky" buy if I think the journey could be fun, even if it ultimately goes nowhere.
The whole more storage space/ hgher bitrate argument is a red herring. For all its "technically superior" specs, which haven't even been finalized, there has been *nothing* showing that it has a practical advantage with the picture/sound. Yea, I heard about Blood Diamond. Its interesting that nobody mentioned that the DVd looks like dog doo, so it must be all HD DVD's fault. Warner still put out far more good quality discs on both formats than any other studio. for all the WHINING about Warner that the ungratefull Blu-nosers do,it makes one wish that Warner had stayed HD DVD exclusive like they originally planned.
Yes, as far as studio support goes, that can change quickly either way, ala DIVX. Seen any new Fox titles lately? STUDIO SUPPORT IS ONLY RELEVANT IN THE TITLES THAT ARE PUT OUT. Having a gajillion titles in your catalog is wothless if you aren't releasing them. Right now, there are about the same number of titles on both formats. BD is clearly focusing on mindless popcorn and children's flicks, that appeal to a younger crowd. HD has less box office hits, but appeals to a wider, frequently older, audience.
Honestly, BD really needs to get its act together. Right now, they are little more than a movie format for the PS3.
For all the chest thunping, BD really isn't any better, and really can't justify its higher price.
Frankly, you should be thankfull for HD DVD. Without it, BD movies would all look like The Fifth Element and House of flying daggers, plus prices would be much much higher than they are now.
That said, I don't expect either format to go away any time soon. Both CAN coexist.
Jack\
PS Bill Hunt is famous for being a BD shill.
PSS. I'm getting tired of Warner holding back titles because in their effort to support both formats, they've had to wait for BD to get their act together so they could release them at the same time.
The jury is still out on low vs. high bitrate VC-1 or AVC1 encodes and until we see larger sampling of movies to judge, I'll have to give the high(er) bit encodes the benefit of the doubt. A quick survey of some HD-DVD and Blu-Ray movie material using a combo player and a 126" display system suggested the relatively low bit rate VC-1 encodes had issues with edges on fast motion sequences.
Soundwise, Is it merely coincidence, there are far more Blu-ray discs with uncompressed PCM soundtracks than on HD-DVD ? The Blu-Ray discs have far more flexibility adding decent soundtracks to the movies than HD-DVD. Or you want to blame the studios for not "putting out".
As far as "Blood Diamond" is concerned, the fact that Warner's did such a lousy job, PQ-wise putting this in high definition means I'm disinclined to buy it (it's only plus is the presence of an uncompressed LPCM track you won't see on the HD-DVD version0. For similar reasons, I'm disinclined to buy "Fifth Element" or "House of Daggers" until the studios get it right. "Blood Diamond" might be the best example of what happens when you try to use relatively low bitrate encoding while skimping on the necessary TLC to prevent the video artifacts (e.g. macroblocking) from showing up on the endproduct. Heck, they probably could have gotten a much better result using well-established MPEG-2 encoding on a 50G Blu-Ray disc.
I want the studios to give me the best possible PQ and SQ on the disc before I buy it. The Blu-ray disc gives the studios the best flexibility to get it done plus still have the extra leftover space for the frills/extras some people seem to like.
Anything specifically that Bill Hunt didn't get right in his comparisons of the two formats ?
.
"Children of Men", "Batman Begins", "Serenity" (?). Not exactly slouches in the PQ department and the effects weren't obvious unless you were really looking for them. And this might have been a manifestation of the particular system it was played in. I'll should revisit this again with other HD-DVD sources (this was before I acquired "King Kong" and "Poseidon") on the home front.
Nevertheless, the chances of detecting artifacts increase with increased screen size. What's not obvious on a 40" screen might become brutally obvious on a 100+" screen. [And after seeing what's possible on a SOTA 1080p Front projector, I'm not real satisfied with my 720p FP].
I don't think any of those are on the "bit starved" movie list, even by the most vocal opponents of VC-1. That said, I'm fairly sure, that if you look hard enough, you can find flaws in quite a few movies. Some people even crank up their sharpness just to see them. In some(many) cases, it may be the compressionist, not the codec. I don't have a projector, but I do have a 60" 1080p set, and I saw that there is visible banding on Planet Earth. Its still a nice box set. Hell, over at AVS, most BD titles, even exclusives, are listed as containing some artifacts. Of the few that don't, 2/3 are from Warner-Imagine that!
enjoy,
Jack
I've had my share of disappointments on Blu-ray; E.g. I thought "Night at the Museum" was good, not great and could have been much better but they had to make it fit on a 25G disc. Could the result have been better if they had a 50G constraint to work with ?
I've the impression making low(er) bitrate encodes require a bit more TLC to mask/eliminate video artifacts; if they don't put in the TLC (or they can't stand higher bitrates because of bandwidth/storage considerations), you get results like "Blood Diamond".
I only watch on a 60" set, so I haven't seen alot of jaggies.
I'm not sure why you keep emphasizing uncompressed lossless audio, when there is compressed lossless as well. Both are lossless. Both sound good. BD may have more flexability, but how many studios are taking advantage of the extra space? Sony does with their MPEG-2, because that *requires* high bitrate and lots of storage space. If that floats your boat...
As for Blood Diamond, The HD DVD won't be out for another month, so we'll see. BTW, that horrid abomination got 3 out of 5 stars in the review that set off all the blu-boys whine-fest. I'll tell you, between the blu-ray folks, and the Sony SXRD threads, you'ld be hard pressed to find a whinier site online.:-)
I do plan on eventually getting a BD player, as soon as they put out some titles I actually want to see. :-) Right now, they are focusing on a very narrow audience.
JackPS. BD has the dubious distinction of being the first of the new formats to suffer laser rot.
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
