 
|
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 |
68.166.204.185
In Reply to: RE: Don't worry, the heat is still on Sony posted by 4season on January 04, 2008 at 20:46:27
DVD market is already saturated (hence reason for DVD sales decline). Blu-ray will still have to show some value added (probably more than picture/sound quality improvements) to get DVD content owners to doubledip; especially with higher HD media prices.
Follow Ups:
For the movie, a 50GB Blu-ray disc with a DTS-HD Master Audio soundtrack mated to a high bitrate AVC video encode. Couldn't get any better than that with today's technology. Any bandwidth that's still available and any room that's left over on the disc after that or a BD25/BD9 could be used for the extras (depending on how much space the extras needed).
A world of video bitrate-starved, mediocre Universal and Warner releases on 30G discs was not my idea of HD media heaven. "Bourne Ultimatum" and "Transformers" turned out to be pretty good transfers but these were the exception in my meager HD DVD collection.
Audio-wise, lossless/uncompressed PCM was 2D4. This is the main reason my HD DVD collection is limited; not enough desirable movies with lossless/uncompressed audio tracks. Also, the possibility of 5.1 24/96 PCM (or higher), high-def music videos was far more likely with Blu-ray because of HD DVD's bandwidth limitations.
They need to make more players that will decode DTS-HDMA instead of just streaming it. Not everyone will want to buy a new receiver just for that.
BTW, how many titles actually use the 50Gigs of space? We already know half are on BD-25s, so I'm guessing not that many.
Jack
As of today, 50.35% of Blu-ray releases are using 50GB discs. This is from the stats site that I posted a while back. That's a strong showing for "vaporware", don't ya think?
:-)
As to DTS-HD Master Audio decoding, the blame lies equally with DTS and the chip manufacturers. DTS: they said it would take more processing power than DTS-HD High Resolution (which manufacturers knew the numbers for), but they didn't say how much more. Chip manufacturers: they should have pressed DTS for better info or at least designed their chips with significantly more processing power. By the way, Keith Jack of Sigma Designs admits that his company dropped the ball. I'll cut him some slack -- they only deserve half of the blame.
Scroll way, way down past that ever growing number of Blu-ray discs to see the
Lets see if it stays over 50% with next week's titles coming out. Care to tell me why the BCI double features are 2 disc sets? The movies aren't very long ( <90 mins), and I doubt there are very many extras. And, as I asked before, but was never answered, "how many titles actually use the 50Gigs?".
Jack
None.But you know as well as I do that studios like to give us useless crap (ie, just look at DVD). Better to have the space and bandwidth to accomodate their desire to include the crap than to lose things that should be there in the first place (lossless audio, for one). By the way, how many DVDs utilized the entire capacity of the format. Hint: none.
Question: you're not implying that having 50GB of storage space has a downside now, are you?
> > > Question: you're not implying that having 50GB of storage space has a downside now, are you? < < <
Outside of possibly lower replication yields, no. But, if its not used, its not an advantage either. This only supports my opinion that generally speaking storage space isn't really a factor in quality either way.
Jack
If over 50% of the movies are using the 50GB discs, then it's a necessity. These movies obviously needed more than 25GB to satisfy what the studio wanted to include for that particular title and satisfy storage and bandwidth requirements. Otherwise, compromises have to be made and audiophiles/videophiles know what that means (quality is the first to take the hit, not content).
"if its not used, its not an advantage either."
If studios are using 50GB discs, then they need them. The fact that over 50% of Blu-ray discs are 50GB versions means the capacity really is needed. And what studio would pay for a 50GB disc when it only needs <25GB to satisfy the above requirements?
Microsoft is never going to tell how many HD DVD encodes they have done which would have benefitted from a higher bandwidth ceiling and/or more storage capacity (at least not truthfully). One can only speculate that there were movies produced that bandwidth and storage capacity played a part in what was the final product. With 50GB of storage and a higher bandwidth ceiling, that type of speculation isn't part of the Blu-ray specs.
Is it really a necessity? Are they using BD-50s on all of those titles now because that have to or just because they can? We'll never know.
Jack
Do you really think that any of the "Lord of the Rings" movies (the extended aka real editions) are better suited to HD DVD than Blu-ray when discussing audio/video quality?
The point is, it's there if it's needed. If it were needed on HD DVD, it's not there -- neither bandwidth nor storage space, hence compromises would have to be made for some movies. The facts are what they are: this discussion has become circular.
I'm done.
| 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 ]