Format neutral supporters wanted - from HD DVD to Blu-ray!

[esteban2]

Originally Posted by br85

Make sure you adjust the volume on the PCM so it doesn't trick you into thinking it sounds better. But don't worry, I think you'll still be able to tell the difference, even when the volume is the same. PCM just feels more "real". Less processing means more quality.

I listen to both PCM and DolbyTruHD via analogs and haven't discerned any difference.

[SNAP]

I have the Eagles Farewell 1 Tour on HD and there's a big difference between the PCM track and the DTS track..........PCM kills it.

Originally Posted by br85

Make sure you adjust the volume on the PCM so it doesn't trick you into thinking it sounds better. But don't worry, I think you'll still be able to tell the difference, even when the volume is the same. PCM just feels more "real". Less processing means more quality.

[br85]

Originally Posted by esteban2

I listen to both PCM and DolbyTruHD via analogs and haven't discerned any difference.

You mean analog as in (player to receiver optical) or (receiver to speaker) analog? Cos everyone has option B (all audible audio is analog ). Not sure what you mean, and if you have option a., you're only gonna hear PCM in stereo, not full surround.

[B-Man13]

Originally Posted by br85

I understand that they are (or should be if they're not resampled) mathematically identical on the disc, but it's about what comes out of your speakers, and that is always a very different case. It doesn't matter how great your system is, you can never suggest that the extra process required to unpack the TruHD signal can be achieved perfectly and without adding any latency to the process.

Think about a wav file that's been put in an ultra efficient zip file. Now imagine, without any prior unpacking, trying to get 5 channels of raw wav data at 24b/48khz in real time. Because that's essentialy what TruHD has to do, and it simply cannot reproduce the signal as it was meant to be unpacked.

I doubt the process is anywhere near as demanding as real-time decoding of the MPEG-4/AVC or VC1 video codecs.

[br85]

Originally Posted by B-Man13

I doubt the process is anywhere near as demanding as real-time decoding of the MPEG-4/AVC or VC1 video codecs.

Maybe not, but AVC and VC1 are not lossless, so we can't really know how well they decode the signal. With PCM vs. TruHD, it is a difference you can hear, and you know why you can hear it.

Do you know how audio word clocks work / what function they provide perchance?

[B-Man13]

Originally Posted by br85

Maybe not, but AVC and VC1 are not lossless, so we can't really know how well they decode the signal. With PCM vs. TruHD, it is a difference you can hear, and you know why you can hear it.

Do you know how audio word clocks work / what function they provide perchance?

I'm merely stating that decoding the video is a LOT more taxing than the audio. I never suggested the video codecs were lossless.

I'm familiar with word clock. If the player is capable of converting the TrueHD signal to PCM (real-time) and then bit-streams that data to the receiver, how would the word clock be affected? Does decoding the TrueHD signal put a pulse in the wrong place? If your devices aren't syncing properly, maybe that has more to do with device setup than codecs. Are you sure that you're actually receiving a TrueHD signal? You may be getting a Dolby Digital signal and not even know it.

This was taken from hidefdigest

Dolby TrueHD
What it is: Dolby TrueHD is a "lossless" compression codec. Although it is compressed to take up less disc space than a PCM track, once decoded it is bit-for-bit identical to the studio master (at either 16-bit or 24-bit resolution, at the discretion of the studio). It may help to think of it like a ZIP file that holds a PCM track. Once you unZIP the file, you get a 100% identical copy of the original PCM, without compromising any sound quality.
Level of support: TrueHD is an optional format on Blu-ray. And since TrueHD is not built in a core+extension configuration, Blu-ray discs that contain a TrueHD track are also required to contain a standard Dolby Digital AC-3 track for compatibility with players that don't support TrueHD.
Examples of discs that use it: 'Ghost Rider', 'The Fifth Element' (Remastered).
How to get it:

* Toslink or Coaxial SPDIF - SPDIF cannot carry a TrueHD signal. If using this connection type, the player will automatically revert to playing back the standard Dolby Digital AC-3 track instead.
* HDMI - If the player does not support TrueHD, it will revert to the standard Dolby Digital track. Some players may decode the TrueHD to PCM and transmit it over any version of HDMI. Other players will instead transmit the TrueHD bitstream to a receiver for decoding (HDMI 1.3 required).
* Multi-channel analog - Either the Blu-ray player will decode the standard Dolby Digital track, or (on some models) will decode the TrueHD and convert it to analog.

[B-Man13]

Originally Posted by br85

Maybe not, but AVC and VC1 are not lossless, so we can't really know how well they decode the signal. With PCM vs. TruHD, it is a difference you can hear, and you know why you can hear it.

Do you know how audio word clocks work / what function they provide perchance?

For some reason my response to this from over an hour ago needs moderator review, perhaps because I posted a link. The short version is this.

I do know what word clock is. It's basically synchronization of 2 or more digital devices using digital pulses. What I don't understand is how the word clock would be affected by PCM vs. TrueHD. Please enlighten me on this.

Also, please tell me where I'm wrong in this train of thought:
If the PCM and TrueHD tracks are generated from the same source at the same sample rate and both are 24bit, then they should both sound identical, right?
If your player is capable of decoding the TrueHD track, it will convert it to PCM and bit stream that signal to your receiver through HDMI.
If your player can not decode TrueHD, then it will bit stream the TrueHD signal through HDMI 1.3 only and the receiver must be capable of decoding the TrueHD track.
If neither of the last two items can be met, then it will revert to the Dolby Digital AC3 track.
If you are sending the audio signal through SPDIF, then it will be down-converted to either a Dolby Digital or DTS signal, depending on the player.

If you are hearing a difference, it is likely that you don't have the proper set-up for the TrueHD track.

[Mosman22]

Originally Posted by br85

Make sure you adjust the volume on the PCM so it doesn't trick you into thinking it sounds better. But don't worry, I think you'll still be able to tell the difference, even when the volume is the same. PCM just feels more "real". Less processing means more quality.

If you can't hear a difference why do some studios put a pcm and true hd track on the same disk, like spiderman 3.

[br85]

Originally Posted by B-Man13

For some reason my response to this from over an hour ago needs moderator review, perhaps because I posted a link. The short version is this.

I do know what word clock is. It's basically synchronization of 2 or more digital devices using digital pulses. What I don't understand is how the word clock would be affected by PCM vs. TrueHD. Please enlighten me on this.dat

Well the word synchronization should be the dead givaway. It is much harder to synchronise a compressed signal than it is to synchronize an uncompressed signal. Remember we are not talking about systems here that work like computers (which always unzip information BEFORE trying to read it), we are talking about a constant stream of audio data vs a constant stream of compressed data, that until decoded, won't make a sound at all. Decoding doesn't just magically "happen" perfectly every time with 0 ms latency.

Also, please tell me where I'm wrong in this train of thought:
If the PCM and TrueHD tracks are generated from the same source at the same sample rate and both are 24bit, then they should both sound identical, right?

In theory, yes.

If your player is capable of decoding the TrueHD track, it will convert it to PCM and bit stream that signal to your receiver through HDMI.
If your player can not decode TrueHD, then it will bit stream the TrueHD signal through HDMI 1.3 only and the receiver must be capable of decoding the TrueHD track.
If neither of the last two items can be met, then it will revert to the Dolby Digital AC3 track.
If you are sending the audio signal through SPDIF, then it will be down-converted to either a Dolby Digital or DTS signal, depending on the player.

If you are hearing a difference, it is likely that you don't have the proper set-up for the TrueHD track.

I highleted what you may not have taken into account. That "conversion process" is where the difference in quality is found! Pure and simple. That is the only difference between matched master sources and the output, and just about everybody says they can hear the difference.

Fact is, this conversion to PCM process is far less than perfect, and perhaps someday in the distant future, this conversion process will be near perfect to the point where no-one can hear the degradation it is currently causing, but right now, no-one is spending the thousands of dollars per unit trying to achieve it, so PCM is just better for now.

[br85]

Originally Posted by Mosman22

If you can't hear a difference why do some studios put a pcm and true hd track on the same disk, like spiderman 3.

Don't know actually, but I have found a good reason to use the truHD track. Since most of them tend to compress the dynamic range a bit it is much better for late night watching. I.e. I can actually hear the dialog in the movie without getting my ears blasted off when the action scenes come.

[mdm1699]

Originally Posted by br85

Yeah but I know lots of people with big flashy TVs with rca cables going out to 4 speakers (splitting red into back and front right, and white into front and back left) who think they have surround sound Not everyone knows the mechanics of it all. I have a flashy mobile phone, but I have no idea how it works. There are lots of people with home theatres that are the same.

I am shocked that so many people claim to know all these clueless friends/family. I setup my sisters new Bravia lcd for her. Don't these households have men? Women now account for a large segment of shoppers for electronics. Also, they ask a lot of questions. I think that this claim, while obvious, is greatly overstated. Is everyone living in a vacuum?

[whippersnapper]

Originally Posted by tron3

Guys, consider why neutral is better. People exclusively in camp red do NOT buy blu-ray, at all - ever.

Neutral adopters DO buy blu-ray. Because the studio support is bigger, the numbers still lean toward camp blu.

Essentially creating their own 2:1 buy ratio. One BD is cancelled out by HD DVD, but plus one BD because of the average 2:1 ratio.

Paramount / Dreamworks stagnates this war. As well as the neutral studios. Neutral adopters are do more good than harm. See all statements above.

Guys, consider why neutral is better.

You can do as you wish and believe as you wish. I'd never fault you for that. In my opinion, neutral IS better than HD-DVD exclusive. But (in my opinion again) neutral is NOT better than Blu-ray exclusive. Simply put, the fewer HD-DVD videos that are bought or rented now, the sooner that the format "battle" struggle will be settled with the better format prevailing and more Blu-ray products becoming available.

[patrick99]

Originally Posted by whippersnapper

You can do as you wish and believe as you wish. I'd never fault you for that. In my opinion, neutral IS better than HD-DVD exclusive. But (in my opinion again) neutral is NOT better than Blu-ray exclusive. Simply put, the fewer HD-DVD videos that are bought or rented now, the sooner that the format "battle" struggle will be settled with the better format prevailing and more Blu-ray products becoming available.

Totally agree.

[whippersnapper]

Originally Posted by BLackie

EXACTLY, next week as being neutral i will buy CARS and RATATUILLE and Aviator on HD DVD. SEE 2:1

Dude, why do I disbelieve your signature I quote below? Could it be because when you have a stated choice (Aviator) you choose HD-DVD rather than Blu-ray?

BLackie's signature:

BLU RAY SUPPORTER!

I WANT BLU!

[whippersnapper]

Originally Posted by fronn

I went format "neutral" today with the $98 dollar A2. (feb 07 manufacture date -- this is definitely dumping old stuff they couldn't sell)

I also picked up transformers because that's about all the Walmart had. There's only a handful of HD DVD releases I want and only one on the schedule for the rest of the year and of what's announced so far for next (Stardust). Anything dual format will definitely go with BR -- I've got like 30 or so pre-orders on BR and soon to be 1 on HD DVD.

I figure Toshiba and pals will end up losing money on me when all is said and done... between the 100+ lost by me purchasing the A2, the money lost from the 5 free and me only owning maybe 6-7 titles by the end of the year and maybe into February (and depending on the situation that may be all they get out of me, outside of a handful more paramount and universal titles). Better me owning it than someone willing to spend hundreds in software in a dying format.

Hopefully Warner can see that this business isn't just about software, you have to be friends with hardware companies as well... Toshiba's route is very unhealthy for the supposed market they are after. If Toshiba was aiming for a proprietary format, they've just succeeded... as nobody else can make any hardware profitable with the sub $200 prices (forget sub $100).

HD DVD is shortsightedness wrapped up in a format -- between the specs, the companies involved, and their business practices... it all just stinks of shortsighted behavior (maybe that has a little to do with desperation).

Warner's "neutrality" is keeping the encoding quality of my Warner's Blu-ray videos down to the level of HD-DVD's quality. So I'll be happy to see them go Blu-ray exclusive.

And every true "format neutral" consumer would want that to happen also since the quality of newly produced Warners video that they buy would go up.

[B-Man13]

Originally Posted by br85

That "conversion process" is where the difference in quality is found! Pure and simple. That is the only difference between matched master sources and the output, and just about everybody says they can hear the difference.

Fact is, this conversion to PCM process is far less than perfect, and perhaps someday in the distant future, this conversion process will be near perfect to the point where no-one can hear the degradation it is currently causing, but right now, no-one is spending the thousands of dollars per unit trying to achieve it, so PCM is just better for now.

So if the conversion process in the player is to blame, would the quality be better if the TrueHD signal was bit-streamed to a high end receiver capable of decoding it?

Are you sure that "everybody" that can hear the difference isn't really hearing the dolby digital track? I'm curious to know what kind of setups and connections are being used for these comparisons. I listed in my last post the requirements needed to hear the TrueHD track.

You originally said the reason people could tell a difference is because the TrueHD source is almost always resampled for less dynamic range making it mathematically different from the PCM track. Do you have a source for this? I did a google search and couldn't find anything. This would be the only reason I can think of why there would be a noticeable difference between the two tracks, and I would like to know for sure that this is what's really happening. I'm close to conceding to your point, but I need proof.

[bootman]

Originally Posted by Mosman22

If you can't hear a difference why do some studios put a pcm and true hd track on the same disk, like spiderman 3.

Because not everyone has a receiver that can decode the advance formats yet.

You will see that by the end of 2008 when just about any receiver you can buy can decode them, PCM will go away.
Hopefully they will use the room for even better video encodes, but more likely it will be more interactive features for 1.1 disks.