 
|
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 |
205.240.11.90
In Reply to: RE: Well, my point is about capacity posted by Jazz Inmate on August 20, 2007 at 17:27:42
If you can't see or hear any Blu-Ray advantages why worry?
And some HD DVDs which deserve to have TrueHD tracks, don't. "King Kong" was supposed to be a reference demo disk but guess what ? No lossless track. Why is that ? Storage capacity limitation ? Bandwidth limitations ? This probably isn't the only example. I think with HD DVD, you will have to make tradeoffs on PQ vs. SQ, particularly with longer movies and/or movies with a tremendous amount of motion.
Another way I see it it, HD DVD may be "good enough" for J6P. I'm not convinced yet it's "good enough" for the HT enthusiast with large investment in audio/video gear. There are a few more examples coming out to evaluate the "higher bit rate/capacity is better" theory. I might even invest to find out directly since HD DVD just got a reprieve.
BTW, I don't think there's anything on HD DVD which matches the PQ on some of the more recent Blu rays (POTC, Apocalypto, etc.).
Per the Wikipedia article, far more HD DVD movies have it because TrueHD hardware support is mandatory in HD DVD, but optional in Blu-Ray. So are you sure you want to make blanket statements about one format's superiority over the other ;-)
But I'm not in a position to judge all the goodness of TrueHD audio yet because I haven't figured out what I'm going to do for the cinema sound system. Normally I'd be building something like a 5 channel EL84 single ended amp, but in this instance, BTU output is a concern: Small room, no A/C, hot Colorado summer. ICEpower amps maybe!?
I don't doubt that Pirates of the Carribean looks & sounds terrific in Blu-Ray, but I don't want to sit through that movie again to verify this! Ditto with Spiderman and most superhero movies except for Hellboy. Hellboy rocked. If I'm paying $15-30 per movie, it had better be a really GOOD movie, and I'm not just talking audio/video quality. For me, superb recordings of crummy movies is videophile hell.
The specs may not mandate codec support but consumer demand will make sure most players have it (well, maybe not the cheap Chinese ones...). Similarly with movies; If the movie doesn't have a lossless audio track, I'll wait for the special edition version which does have it.
As for "classic" movies, I suspect Universal et al have done a mediocre job with some of the video transfers. The early Blu-Ray movies had PQ issues as well. I'm going to attempt to take a more disciplined approach to purchasing HD movies...must.... resist.... In general, the Studios need to do a better job of maximimizing the PQ/SQ available for HD. They also need to do a better job of releasing movies period; I'm getting a little tired of the Superhero/comicbook stuff good for little more than single viewings/demo material.
Most non-CGI movies shot on 35mm film are not going to "pop" off the screen the way one that is heavily (or entirely) computer-generated can. But all the same, I think movies like "12 Monkeys" and "Lost In Translation" are totally worth the HD treatment. Mostly I care about getting the best available recordings of really good movies, and I don't want to sweat the small details.
I agree. I really love my HD DVD copy of Forbidden Planet, its way better than the DVD version.
Jack
Jack still hasn't said whether The Prestige HD DVD import has LPCM audio. The blu-ray sure does. If even one blu-ray title gets LPCM that would on HD DVD get TrueHD, that justifies the format right there AFAIC. And I suspect it will impact much more than one title.
bonus content is another consideration (granted, I mainly care about the movie).
The bottom line is that we don't know what content or features are coming from filmmakers. One probability is 7.1 audio. Ok, most people don't care about that, but my point is that we have one format with significantly greater flexibility and capacity to handle more content. Even if you guys don't believe that greater bitrates translate to greater quality (which should seem obvious), you have to admit it provides greater capacity and greater flexibility and therefore is the better format.
-------------"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
Sorry, I decided to watch a movie.:-)
No there isn't lossless on there, but with 7 Gigs left there could have been. The *chose* not to have it, not for any technical limitations.
Jack
And wait for the next "special edition" with the "new and improved" lossless soundtrack.
I'm more interested in what the formats deliver right now, and in the next few months, because who can predict much beyond that?
I'm still struggling in figuring out how I could accomodate a 5.1 channel sound system in a way that both sounds and looks good; 7.1 is probably not going to happen anytime soon. I don't generally like panned front-to-rear sound effects like those in the early Star Wars movies: Too distracting.
Whether the individual takes advantage of it is up to them. Most more than likely will not have all the equipment necessary to take full advantage.
Let's take SD DVD. Some folks just hook it straight to the TV for the sound. For SACD, most discs come with a multichannel track for which most don't take advantage of.
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 ]
